Thursday, April 7, 2011

Declare Victory and Govern

As an independent who generally doesn't have a dog in these fights, my strong preference is to not pick sides in them. But, I do have to tell you here, in this current budget stalemate/mess down in DC, the Republicans (in my opinion) are definitely much more to blame. I mean, I know that the Democrats had a chance to pass a budget bill last year and that they didn't, etc., but currently, as we're speaking, the tea party wing of the Republican Party is just flat-out not acting responsibly............................................................................................... a) The Democrats have apparently already met the Republicans more than half-way (full-way, if you strictly go by Boehner). And b) The Republicans themselves have acted recalcitrantly by gunking up this entire process with B.S, irrelevant riders, etc.. Yes, folks, I know, the Republicans were elected to cut spending, reduce the size of government, etc.. I get it. But they were also elected to govern, damn it. Compromise - it isn't always a dirty word..................................................................................................P.S. And the fact that one of these "riders" completely dismantles Planned Parenthood, one of the very few entries still available for poor woman's health-care....When, me-buckos, was THAT part and parcel to the tea party agenda?


Rusty Shackleford said...

Why are you always looking for a compromise from the Republicans?
Where was the compromise from the left when Pelosi and Reid rammed Obamacare down americas collective throat without any input from a single Repulican.You seem to forget Obama telling John McCain "we won" at a hoax of a healthcare summit.Well,it seems elections do in fact matter,the people spoke in 2010.The dems had two years to pass a budget and wanted nothing to do with voting on one prior to last years years election,fearful of the publics reaction to their drunkin sailor spending habits which they still
wish to continue.I say the hell with them....shut the son of a bitch down.
As for Planned Parenthood,I dont want one dime of my tax money going to a group who happily points teen aged girls in the direction of abortion mills,usually without giving a thought to notifying the parents.Nor do I want one dime of my tax money used to fund NPR and PBS.

Beach Bum said...

Rusty I agree with you, the dems acted like asses after the 2008election but I dare you to honestly tell be the republicans did any better for the years between 2000 and 2006 they had control of congress and the White House.

As for the American people "speaking" in 2010 you guys had a far more golden chance to sweep away everyone in both the House and Senate than in 1994 when times were light-years better. This time with the economy sucking and on life support you only won the House.

Yeah, let the republicans shut the government down. That works so well for Newt back in the 90's.

w-dervish said...

Rusty, I don't know how you can say "the people spoke in 2010" when only 29 percent of eligible voters cast ballots. 62 percent of eligible voters cast ballots in 2008, and they the majority of them chose Barack Obama and the Democrats.

The people spoke in 2008. In 2010 the Republicans "won" a non-mandate by default because the people did NOT speak.

Also, the Republicans WERE asked for their input regarding health care reform. They had no ideas except the notion that we should "start over".

I don't want any of my tax dollars going to either of bush's illegal wars... guess what, I don't have a choice. Neither do you.

BTW none of the money that goes to Planed Parenthood funds abortions, although I think it should. As for NPR and PBS -- I support them completely and I want them to get my tax dollars.

Funding for Planned Parenthood isn't something I believe the Democrats should "compromise" on. It stays or NO DEAL.

Rusty Shackleford said...

I love it when you libs try to justify getting trounced in an election...the fact is the house got turned upside down and if the party had'nt run those two nitwits in Navada and Deleware Harry Reid would have went the way of Nancy Pelosi.
And please dont try to rewrite history...there was NO Republican input into Obamacare nor were they asked for input.
And yes you are correct PP does'nt actually do abortions but they are most eager to point a woman of any age towards the nearest abortion mill.
As for the illegal wars...your boy seems more then willing to not only continue them but to start new ones.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Russ, the Democrats initially proposed 4.7 billion in budget cuts, the republicans 61 billion. The Democrats moved to 33 billion and the Republicans didn't budge at all (though, yes, they ultimately may). Considering that the Defense Department isn't being touched at all here, that seems like a pretty decent compromise.......As for Planned Parenthood, if the Republicans want to get rid of it, then they should pass separate legislation and not try and hold the entire budget process hostage. And I'm telling you here, if you end up getting rid of Planned Parenthood, you're probably going to end up with MORE abortions (this, in that poor women will have much less access to birth control).......I agree with you that the health-care bill was a turkey but the Republicans did have a seat in those negotiations (Grassley, Snow, and a 3rd guy whose name I don't remember). That, and they were able to get a shitload of amendments offered.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

I also ask you, Russ, compare this present Democratic plan to the 1993 Republican alternative to Hillarycare. The 2 plans really aren't all that different (individual mandates, etc.)....It's like, what, they were for it before they were against it?

Rusty Shackleford said...

The Republicans had a "shit load of amendments?" Really? Name three Republican amendments included in Obamacare?

And for christ sake stop with the typical lefty scare tactics..."there will be more abortions." Federal funding is 30% of PP yearly budget,if you bleeding hearts want to cover that...write them a check,hey its deductable.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Less birth control equals more unwanted pregnancies equals more abortions. And very little of what Planned Parenthood does even involves abortion. They do breast exams and pap-smears for people who can't afford it. I agree with you on NPR, Russ (let the market decide what stations are successful). But on providing health-care for poor and destitute women, yeah, my heart does bleed a little for that.

The Heathen Republican said...

Will, you're often persuaded by facts, so let me give it a shot. As you say, the Democrats failed to pass a budget last year, so they have only themselves to blame. The Republican House were elected to govern, and they have by passing a budget last week. Senate Democrats have not put a budget up for a vote, so it is Senate Democrats who are failing to govern.

As for the riders, how do we cast the blame here? Riders are part of every budget, so it's not that the GOP has done anything unprecedented. Yes, they included some ideological items, like cutting funding for NPR and Planned Parenthood. So, one could argue that the GOP has risked a shut-down over a single issue, like Planned Parenthood. However, you could equally say that Democrats are risking a shut-down over the same issue.

The GOP House passed a budget. The Democrat Senate is refusing to vote on the budget. Obama opposes the GOP version of the budget. How is this the GOP's fault when they're the only ones trying to govern?

The Democrats could shove it right back at Republicans if the Democrat Senate would pass a budget of their own, excluding Planned Parenthood. Obama could publicly endorse it. Then the GOP would be the ones holding things up over a single ideological issue. Just a thought.

The Heathen Republican said...

"only 29 percent of eligible voters cast ballots"

w-dervish, are you serious? When an election doesn't go your way, you're going to trot out turnout numbers? By all standards, 2010 was a historic election. You lost.

"the Democrats initially proposed 4.7 billion in budget cuts, the republicans 61 billion. The Democrats moved to 33 billion and the Republicans didn't budge at all"

Will, this is all smoke and mirrors for the media. Negotiations don't matter -- what matters is votes. If Democrats in the Senate passed a budget at $4.7 billion or $33 billion, the Republican House would have to make a choice. Numbers thrown about in conference rooms or on talk shows don't matter, and that goes for both parties.

w-dervish said...

WTF Heathen, are YOU serious? All you care about is that an election goes your way, screw democracy? Democracy is dependant on people voting. 29 percent does not, in my mind, qualify. That isn't democracy. It's an imitation of it. 2010 was an historic election? What a joke that claim is.

What the 2008 election PROVED is that when greater numbers of people turn out Democrats win. This is why both you and Rusty had something negative to say about my revelation of the facts. These facts scare you. You know that unless the turnout is low your side is going to LOSE.

The Heathen Republican said...

Would you prefer Australian-rules democracy where everyone is required by law to vote? Should I also point out that you have your terms wrong? We don't live in a democracy... it's called a republic.

All of my life I've gotten used to 50% of adults voting and 25% of adults deciding elections. Your citation of 62% in 2008 versus 29% in 2010 -- an off-year election -- doesn't impress me.

I want to live in a free country, which includes the freedom not to vote. If people don't care enough, of course I don't want them casting ballots. Odds are they'll vote with their emotions or based on what the person who drove tells them, and that just puts more Democrats in office.

I said nothing about only caring about an election going my way, nor did I say "screw democracy"... those are your words. My point was that you're a sore loser looking for anything to make yourself feel better. You've proven my point with your second comment.

If you deny that 2010 was historic, by any objective measure, than you're unable to be objective.

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Your points are fair ones, HR (and, believe me, I am more than willing to divvy out blame/responsibility here). I just think that with the Republicans controlling only 1/3 of the apparatus down there, they probably should have shown more flexibility.......The debate may now be moot, though. According to Chuck Todd, a deal has now been reached at 38 billion in cuts/nothing extracted from Planned Parenthood. Hopefully the country can move on now.

Rusty Shackleford said...

HR has hit the nail on the head.Whenever liberals lose an election they look for ten thousand reasons why the American electorate would ever be stupid enough to reject their policies.The fact is they resoundingly lost the house no matter the percentage of actual voters.If the liberals cared enough for their principals they should have flocked to the polls.My guess is they realized the error made electing the big eared community orgainzer who's only talent has show to be speech making and they just stayed home out of embarrassment.The dems hero Bill Clinton got elected with 44%...hell,Lincoln only got 42% in 1860.That small turnout dog does'nt hunt.

Voltron said...

just to throw my two cents in on the WD dogpile,

"The people spoke in 2008. In 2010 the Republicans "won" a non-mandate by default because the people did NOT speak."

You could also say that those who stayed home on election day spoke as well. (and loudly)

I think the vast majority now "hope" after this train wreck of an administration is over they'll have some "change" left in their pockets...

Will "take no prisoners" Hart said...

Gents, I don't think that Mr. Obama has been all that hostile to the right of late. He agreed to the an extension of the Bush tax-cuts (yes, perhaps reluctantly) and now the 38 billion in spending cuts. Maybe we can give him at least a little credit for being practical.

w-dervish said...

Pratical? Is that what the "middle" calls it when you fold and give your opponent exactly what they want? I call it a strategic mistake that may have cost him his re-election.

they just stayed home out of embarrassment

Maybe they WERE embarassed to vote for a party which was (apparently) working with the Republicans to sabotage the economy. Democrats should have voted to REJECT Republican calls to extend the bush tax cuts before the election. They didn't and people were understandly PO'd.

Hopefully the country can move on now.

Maybe the country is ready to move on, bur the teabagger Republicans in the House plan on fighting this exact same fight again when the vote to raise the debt ceiling comes up. Hopefully their shenanigans are enough to convince people we've got to throw them out at the next available opportunity.

These liars said their focus was going to be jobs and the deficit. Planned Parenthood funding is 0.0083 percent of the budget.

Rusty Shackleford said...

Come on WD,you guys made out like gave up 39 billion in spending cuts so you can continue to kill all the unborn babies you choose to.

w-dervish said...

I'm against cutting spending unless it's military spending. We don't have a spending problem, we have a revenue problem.

The Democrats were snookered again! 39 billion in stimulus cut from the budget is going to HURT President Obama's chances at re-election (not to mention the economy)...

But on the other hand I do approve of killing babies*... To bad the Republicans are going to try to defund PP again. This fight isn't over, as I pointed out in my previous comment.

*I approve of government-funded abortions, of which there currently are NONE. Apparently Rusty hasn't heard of the Hyde amendment.

I'd like to repeal the Hyde amendment, so saying I should get all excited because the House teagabbers extorted 39 billion in cuts from the Dems... BUT we get to keep funding for Planned Parenthood... THAT dog doesn't hunt.

Rusty Shackleford said...

How typical poor WD is...more then willing to kill an unborn baby but not a convicted murderer.

w-dervish said...

Rusty said... How typical poor WD is...more then willing to kill an unborn baby but not a convicted murderer.

Yep, you got that right.