• 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!

What's more important?

Which is more important?


  • Total voters
    17
You're not talking facts. You're talking rhetoric. The Reps have offered to negotiate with a car they don't own. That's not negotiation, that's dishonesty. Obamacare is law. The Reps don't like that. Too bad. Negotiate current funding issues, not stopping the implementation. By doing the latter, the Reps are holding the US people hostage. Now, of course you can't see this because you are incapable of seeing the blame on your side of the issue. I, of course, have already pointed on the blame on the Dem side. And, your presentation of immigration is a red herring and another matter. Do remember that two wrongs don't make a right.

Obamacare as it stands today is not the law that was originally passed. Obama himself has opened the door to this line of questioning with his granting wavers, exemptions and delays to his friends and for political reasons. The Reps have every right in the world to put their two cents in and look for delays for us citizens too or to question the wavers and exemptions Obama unilaterally handed out like some kind of king.
 
The "shutdown", which doesn't really shut much down, is a nuisance and an unnecessary expense. The real damage will come if and when the government defaults.

Who is to blame? Look in the mirror. We're the ones who elected the current crop of partisan extremists who would rather rant, leap, hoot, and point fingers of blame than take care of the nation's business.

What we should do is make it clear that this silly and destructive political gamesmanship is to end soon, and without a default, or we will vote against every incumbent in the next couple of elections, then make it stick.

But, alas, we won't. The Congresscritters who are playing these games know that their districts are so gerrymandered that they have enough voters who buy into the "it's the other guys" nonsense that they'll be reelected no matter what.
 
Obamacare as it stands today is not the law that was originally passed. Obama himself has opened the door to this line of questioning with his granting wavers, exemptions and delays to his friends and for political reasons. The Reps have every right in the world to put their two cents in and look for delays for us citizens too or to question the wavers and exemptions Obama unilaterally handed out like some kind of king.

This is a budget issue with something that is law. It would be like the Reps demanding to delay further implementation of Social Security to "put their two cents in". Discuss funding the law. Implementation is off the table based on law. By going this route, they hold the US citizenry hostage for a political agenda.
 
Btw, sawyer... your posts in this thread have shown that for you, what's most important is blaming the Democrats, not the economic results. I do hope you voted accordingly.
 
Btw, sawyer... your posts in this thread have shown that for you, what's most important is blaming the Democrats, not the economic results. I do hope you voted accordingly.

As I said earlier, knowing which party wants to use us as pawns is extremely important to know. I have enjoyed our conversation this morning but I am officially 27 minutes late to work. My boss is a complete ass hole and won't put up with this! I'm self employed.:lol:
 
As I said earlier, knowing which party wants to use us as pawns is extremely important to know. I have enjoyed our conversation this morning but I am officially 27 minutes late to work. My boss is a complete ass hole and won't put up with this! I'm self employed.:lol:

Yeah, I'm about 10 minutes late... and my boss... me... is pretty lenient about those kinds of things.

Have a good day.
 
As I said earlier, knowing which party wants to use us as pawns is extremely important to know. I have enjoyed our conversation this morning but I am officially 27 minutes late to work. My boss is a complete ass hole and won't put up with this! I'm self employed.:lol:

Whatever you do, don't fire yourself. Jobs are hard to get in this economy.

Sure, it's important to know which party to blame. Right now, it looks like the two major ones shoulder most of it. It's time for a third party.
 
The Fed refers to the Federal Reserve Bank, which I don't think was shut down.

The effects are more important than the blame game BS.
 
The difference is Reps made an opening offer and asked for negotiations to begin, Dems are the ones that said my way or the highway and refused to talk.

That's one perspective. Another is the Democrats already negotiated to drop their 1.2 trillion dollar request down to the Republicans 980 some billion prior to the Republicans adding the defunding rider to the CR. Hence the stalemate, one side feeling they had a negotiated deal and the other saying it is time to negotiate. Such is life in Washington D.C.
 
Whatever you do, don't fire yourself. Jobs are hard to get in this economy.

Sure, it's important to know which party to blame. Right now, it looks like the two major ones shoulder most of it. It's time for a third party.

That has been my feeling for a very long time. The major stumbling block to a viable third party is the election laws are written by the Republicans and Democrats as a mutual protection act making next to impossible for a third party to rise above irrelevance. Being part of Perot's two campaigns, I saw this first hand. Since then the two major parties have strengthen the laws in an attempt to make sure another Perot doesn't rise. They also took the presidential debate away from the League of Women's voters to ensure that no third party candidate is again allowed to participate in them. Then there is the money problem, corporations and wall street spread around their hundreds of millions to the two major party candidates and they do not want to have to add a third.
 
That has been my feeling for a very long time. The major stumbling block to a viable third party is the election laws are written by the Republicans and Democrats as a mutual protection act making next to impossible for a third party to rise above irrelevance. Being part of Perot's two campaigns, I saw this first hand. Since then the two major parties have strengthen the laws in an attempt to make sure another Perot doesn't rise. They also took the presidential debate away from the League of Women's voters to ensure that no third party candidate is again allowed to participate in them. Then there is the money problem, corporations and wall street spread around their hundreds of millions to the two major party candidates and they do not want to have to add a third.

That sums up the situation pretty well. Meanwhile, the voters just aren't willing to ignore the propaganda coming from the unholy alliance between big business and the two major parties and vote their best interests.

When money talks, people listen.
When people talk, money just sits there.
 
That sums up the situation pretty well. Meanwhile, the voters just aren't willing to ignore the propaganda coming from the unholy alliance between big business and the two major parties and vote their best interests.

When money talks, people listen.
When people talk, money just sits there.

I think Perot summed it up and he borrowed this from someone else, perhaps George Wallace back in 1968. He said we have only one political party with two wings, the Republican wing and the Democratic wing. Now come to think of it, George said there wasn't a dimes worth of difference between the two parties. So it must have been someone else.
 
I think Perot summed it up and he borrowed this from someone else, perhaps George Wallace back in 1968. He said we have only one political party with two wings, the Republican wing and the Democratic wing. Now come to think of it, George said there wasn't a dimes worth of difference between the two parties. So it must have been someone else.

I don't know who said it, but the fact of the matter is that there really is very little difference between the two parties. It's like Coke and Pepsi, they're pretty much the same, but each one still has its loyal followers.
 
I don't know who said it, but the fact of the matter is that there really is very little difference between the two parties. It's like Coke and Pepsi, they're pretty much the same, but each one still has its loyal followers.

I've been an RC man all my life and can remember when Pepsi was known as PepsiCo and was the fourth or fifth ranking cola. But yes, I agree. The rhetoric is completely opposite, but the actions remain the same.
 
From what I've seen, the American dollar has boomed over the past couple of weeks against all major currencies and while there have been a few bumps in the markets, the Dow is doing booming business this morning.

Never forget, in times of economic and financial upheaval, the American dollar and the American stock markets are both the safest havens for money world-wide. Only fools are selling off America now.

This is a political game, nothing more, nothing less. But your country's financial health may depend on how determined Republicans are to keep the pressure on.

Did you read the article? Investor confidence is down.
 
Last edited:
I would have voted for a third option, both. Economic results are of primary importance but knowing who wants to shut down gov to get their way is also important.

The question is which is more important. Putting both as an option wouldn't make sense.
 
Btw, sawyer... your posts in this thread have shown that for you, what's most important is blaming the Democrats, not the economic results. I do hope you voted accordingly.

About that. I've made a few polls now, and I always click make public, but it never seems to?
 
That's one perspective. Another is the Democrats already negotiated to drop their 1.2 trillion dollar request down to the Republicans 980 some billion prior to the Republicans adding the defunding rider to the CR. Hence the stalemate, one side feeling they had a negotiated deal and the other saying it is time to negotiate. Such is life in Washington D.C.

Fair point.
 
But they could be equally important so the question itself creates a vacuum. It's like asking me who I care more about, my wife or my bird dog. :lol:

No it's not, and I would hope the answer is your wife. :lol: This is why I put not sure as an option.
 
That's my bad. I always though Fed referred to the government. :lol:

If you pluralize it ("Feds") it think it could refer to federal government regulators, law enforcement, etc. I knew you meant though, as did everyone else, apparently.
 
If you pluralize it ("Feds") it think it could refer to federal government regulators, law enforcement, etc. I knew you meant though, as did everyone else, apparently.
Even if people knew what I meant, I appreciate your correction. :thumbs: I don't like misusing terms.
 
Which one gets to ride in the cab?

Fortunately I have a king cab, room for both. Really though my dog points and fetches while my wife won't even fetch my slippers and the only time she points is when she is showing me things she wants done around the house.
 
Back
Top Bottom