Seriously...we can't believe that this extreme level of debilitating brinksmanship is what the Founding Fathers intended (Representatives, Congress)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We should not stand for the method of operation that has not become commonplace in DC.
I don't care who you are or which political party you align yourself with. Letting ANY minority coalition say, "I don't like the way the legislation turned out for my side; I'm going to threaten the nation with default and force hundreds of thousands of people out of their jobs until I get my way" is bad for democracy.
That's what elections are for, people. There are winners and there are losers. That's where the "voice of the people" is heard. If it's a law, it's a law until it is repealed. You don't have to like it, but you do have to respect it if you want to be a participant in a democratic system.
The Constitution rightfully wanted division of power and checks and balances, but I doubt that the Founding Fathers would have contemplated that a few people would use the threat of default and government shutdown to sabotage approved law when they can't come up with the votes.
This can't be the way forward. It's not right now when Republicans don't like that they lost fair and square on Obamacare. And it won't be right one day in the future when Democrats lose fair and square on taxes or gun control. You have to respect outcomes, even if you don't like them. That is fundamental to our system of government.
We need to come up with a way to amend the Constitution that respects checks and balances but doesn't allow a small minority to tyrannize the nation with this degree of economic harm when they don't get their way.
We should not stand for the method of operation that has not become commonplace in DC.
I don't care who you are or which political party you align yourself with. Letting ANY minority coalition say, "I don't like the way the legislation turned out for my side; I'm going to threaten the nation with default and force hundreds of thousands of people out of their jobs until I get my way" is bad for democracy.
So why did you support the Democrats in the Senate doing just that?
So why did you support the Democrats in the Senate doing just that?
They didn't. They were holding true to the principle that this is not an appropriate strategy, which it isn't. Not negotiating with someone who is resorting to dangerously abusive tactics because they don't like democratic outcomes is not wrong; it's right. And it wouldn't matter which political parties are doing it vs. opposing it.
Good lord, what a bunch of sissies around here. So we had a little political dust-up. BFD. You folks never read any American history? This will be a footnote in history. If it's that.
We should not stand for the method of operation that has not become commonplace in DC.
I don't care who you are or which political party you align yourself with. Letting ANY minority coalition say, "I don't like the way the legislation turned out for my side; I'm going to threaten the nation with default and force hundreds of thousands of people out of their jobs until I get my way" is bad for democracy.
That's what elections are for, people. There are winners and there are losers. That's where the "voice of the people" is heard. If it's a law, it's a law until it is repealed. You don't have to like it, but you do have to respect it if you want to be a participant in a democratic system.
The Constitution rightfully wanted division of power and checks and balances, but I doubt that the Founding Fathers would have contemplated that a few people would use the threat of default and government shutdown to sabotage approved law when they can't come up with the votes.
This can't be the way forward. It's not right now when Republicans don't like that they lost fair and square on Obamacare. And it won't be right one day in the future when Democrats lose fair and square on taxes or gun control. You have to respect outcomes, even if you don't like them. That is fundamental to our system of government.
We need to come up with a way to amend the Constitution that respects checks and balances but doesn't allow a small minority to tyrannize the nation with this degree of economic harm when they don't get their way.
If you did not allow the Federal government to get so large or to have this much influence in your life then what they do or don't do would be a non-issue. Do you think the Amish care about any of this?
They didn't. They were holding true to the principle that this is not an appropriate strategy. Not negotiating with someone who is resorting to abusive tactics because they don't like democratic outcomes is not wrong; it's right. And it wouldn't matter which political parties are doing it vs. opposing it.
How is acting within the constitution an "abusive tactic"?
How is acting within the constitution an "abusive tactic"?
It is not acting within the spirit of the Constitution. It is an abusive tactic. And deeply unpopular, because most Americans recognize how contrary it is to the kind of government fundamentally envisioned here.
We should not stand for the method of operation that has not become commonplace in DC.
I don't care who you are or which political party you align yourself with. Letting ANY minority coalition say, "I don't like the way the legislation turned out for my side; I'm going to threaten the nation with default and force hundreds of thousands of people out of their jobs until I get my way" is bad for democracy.
That's what elections are for, people. There are winners and there are losers. That's where the "voice of the people" is heard. If it's a law, it's a law until it is repealed. You don't have to like it, but you do have to respect it if you want to be a participant in a democratic system.
The Constitution rightfully wanted division of power and checks and balances, but I doubt that the Founding Fathers would have contemplated that a few people would use the threat of default and government shutdown to sabotage approved law when they can't come up with the votes.
This can't be the way forward. It's not right now when Republicans don't like that they lost fair and square on Obamacare. And it won't be right one day in the future when Democrats lose fair and square on taxes or gun control. You have to respect outcomes, even if you don't like them. That is fundamental to our system of government.
We need to come up with a way to amend the Constitution that respects checks and balances but doesn't allow a small minority to tyrannize the nation with this degree of economic harm when they don't get their way.
I agree with your assessment except for two points:
1) Democrats didn't win "fair and square" on Obamacare. They used parliamentary reconciliation, which is normally reserved for tax and spending bills, while simultaneously arguing that Obamacare is not a tax, while also buying votes via the Louisiana Purchase and Cornhusker Kickback because even moderate Democrats didn't like the bill. They then passed the bill without one single Republican vote. That's not "fair and square" by any stretch of the imagination.
2) I do not support a Constitutional Amendment that debilitates the minority. That's called tyranny.
I doubt the founders envisioned a federal government that employed hundreds of thousands of people.
They also didn't create a democracy, but rather a republic governed by the people's elected representatives.
Sure, the president won an election, but so did every congressional representative and senator.
And yes, the ACA was passed into law, but so were immigration laws. Not to mention DOMA, slavery, and a host of other things that are now not law.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
