What have they compromised on yet?

 

Continued funding at sequestration levels. What are Republicans giving up?

Continued funding at sequestration levels. What are Republicans giving up?

That's not a compromise, they didn't have choice thanks to Obama setting that up last time.

How much debt is too much?

 

Let's ask bond market.

If the roles were reversed and Democrats were to demand complete repeal of the Bush tax cuts as a part of a CR to fund the government or fund the debt ceiling, would you believe that the Republicans should compromise anything to keep the government functioning and the economy not-blowing-up?

 

What are Republicans giving up?

Let's ask bond market.

Nice dodge. How about we don't pass a budget/ CR that we cannot afford...when rates go up how do we pay interest that is 200-300 billion more a year?

 

Yes. Let's ask the bond market without the FED buying treasuries. DONE lets do it.

If the roles were reversed and Democrats were to demand complete repeal of the Bush tax cuts as a part of a CR to fund the government or fund the debt ceiling, would you believe that the Republicans should compromise anything to keep the government functioning and the economy not-blowing-up?

 

What are Republicans giving up?

Increasing the debt ceiling. remember, that is supposed to be a sign of a failed leadership to raise the debt ceiling.

Increasing the debt ceiling.

 

Republicans are giving up not blowing up the world economy. That's not really a sacrifice.

Nice dodge. How about we don't pass a budget/ CR that we cannot afford...when rates go up how do we pay interest that is 200-300 billion more a year?

 

Yes. Let's ask the bond market without the FED buying treasuries. DONE lets do it.

 

Passing a CR and passing a budget are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. One is funding payments that have already been approved. Sure, if republicans can build a coalition that can pass a budget reducing spending, go right ahead! That's the democratic process. But don't block actually paying out money for things you've already purchased. That's childish, reckless and stupid.

 

As for last part, fine, let's do it!

Increasing the debt ceiling. remember, that is supposed to be a sign of a failed leadership to raise the debt ceiling.

 

 

And in that scenario young Barack Obama led a democratic revolt that led Democrats to bring country to the brink of default...

 

Oh wait, that never happened, sorry, yeah, I got lost in your equivocations again.

And in that scenario young Barack Obama led a democratic revolt that led Democrats to bring country to the brink of default...

 

Oh wait, that never happened, sorry, yeah, I got lost in your equivocations again.

Yeah, you do daydream a lot.

Yeah, you do daydream a lot.

Alpha, do you see why most people don't see "not blowing up the economy" isn't a compromise by a rational, good faith negotiator?

Seriously Alpha are you trolling?

Guys, it doesn't matter that the republicans are holding the economy and government hostage. They were pushed to this edge when then-Sen. Barack Obama said that raising the debt ceiling was a failure of leadership under George W. Bush.

The right has taken up the individualism to the extent that if Policy X doesn't directly and immediately affect the speaker in a negative way, then it is acceptable. Things included in "things that affect the speaker in a negative way" are, of course, any expenditures above revenues. Things that don't negatively affect the speaker include catastrophic harm to others that could be avoided by not taking an unreasonable approach to governance and budgeting.

OK, not related directly to the shutdown other than it's the hot political issue of the moment, but here is an idea I've been kicking around:

 

Left or right, I think we can all agree that a big part of the problems with current politics is that elected officials are making too many decisions based on future re-election prospects and not enough decisions based on what they actually think is the best thing for the country.

 

So, lets have the elected officials face fewer elections. It would of course take a constitutional amendment but:

 

1) Presidential term is increased from 4-6 years but limited to one term.

 

2) House term is increased from 2 to 3 years and is limited to 8 terms.

 

3) Senate term remains 6 years but is limited to 4 terms.

 

Election years move from every three years to every six years. In years divisible by 6, there are elections for President, half the Senate, and all of the House. In years divisible by 3 but not by 6, there are elections for the other half of the Senate and all of the House.

 

This of course doesn't come close to solving all of the problems with the current political system, but I do think it's a good start.

Seriously Alpha are you trolling?

Seriously, just pass the damn cr with a delay on Obamacare and then your shutdown is over. Then get your asses back into session and decide this thing NOW, but COMPROMISING, not saying you will do it my way only, clean, or i won't pass it. reid has had multiple chances to do it, and failed to do so. Both sides are playing politcs here, you choose to only vilify one.

Seriously, just pass the damn cr with a delay on Obamacare and then your shutdown is over. Then get your asses back into session and decide this thing NOW, but COMPROMISING, not saying you will do it my way only, clean, or i won't pass it. reid has had multiple chances to do it, and failed to do so. Both sides are playing politcs here, you choose to only vilify one.

 

Hahaha. Compromising gives both sides something they want. You can't tell me what the conservatives are "giving up" is allowing the country to be funded with the appropriations they've already approved.

 

I have a great compromise for you, Alpha.

 

If you agree to give me $5,000, I will give you not vandalizing your house. Let's meet in the middle.

Hahaha. Compromising gives both sides something they want. You can't tell me what the conservatives are "giving up" is allowing the country to be funded with the appropriations they've already approved.

 

I have a great compromise for you, Alpha.

 

If you agree to give me $5,000, I will give you not taking your house. Let's meet in the middle.

 

Change one word, and you become the government.

Seriously, just pass the damn cr with a delay on Obamacare and then your shutdown is over. Then get your asses back into session and decide this thing NOW, but COMPROMISING, not saying you will do it my way only, clean, or i won't pass it. reid has had multiple chances to do it, and failed to do so. Both sides are playing politcs here, you choose to only vilify one.

 

I think both sides are asshats. I just personally find what the GOP is doing distasteful. There are ways to do things and this is not a way to do things.

Seriously, just pass the damn cr with a delay on Obamacare and then your shutdown is over. Then get your asses back into session and decide this thing NOW, but COMPROMISING, not saying you will do it my way only, clean, or i won't pass it. reid has had multiple chances to do it, and failed to do so. Both sides are playing politcs here, you choose to only vilify one.

Again, what are the republicans giving up? Not shutting down government? Not seriously damaging the economy? Why is anybody supposed to consider these as legitimate bargaining chips and not ransom demands?

Seriously, just pass the damn cr with a delay on Obamacare and then your shutdown is over. Then get your asses back into session and decide this thing NOW, but COMPROMISING, not saying you will do it my way only, clean, or i won't pass it. reid has had multiple chances to do it, and failed to do so. Both sides are playing politcs here, you choose to only vilify one.

Why won't Boehner allow a vote on a clean cr and a clean debt ceiling in the house?

The budgets the House is passing are jokes. They might as well put "Obama must step down and be replaced by Romney" in the bills. It's not compromise to expect the Democrats to dump their entire platform of the past few years including things that they managed to pass through Congress.

I walk up to you and punch you in the dick 6 times.

You say "lostfan WTF stop!"

I say okay, how about I just punch you in the dick 3 more times? It's a compromise.

You say "no how about you don't do it all? What is wrong with you?"

I tell everyone you're being unreasonable and you refuse to negotiate.

Seriously, just pass the damn cr with a delay on Obamacare and then your shutdown is over. Then get your asses back into session and decide this thing NOW, but COMPROMISING, not saying you will do it my way only, clean, or i won't pass it. reid has had multiple chances to do it, and failed to do so. Both sides are playing politcs here, you choose to only vilify one.

If Boehner put the clean CR the Senate passed (which sucks, btw but that's not the point) to a vote, it would pass relatively easily. But he won't do it. I don't know what his end game is. I don't know what how this represents anything remotely resembling a representative democracy, where a majority vote by elected representatives isn't good enough. Not even the phony democracy we pretend to have.

 

I really wish we had a parliamentary style system so when the legislature gets this incompetent or stupid we could just s***can them all and start over.

FWIW there have been multiple reports that if Boehner would allow a clean CR to come to the floor, it would pass easily. It would just severely piss off the hard liners and the primary voters.

 

http://washingtonexaminer.com/how-30-house...article/2536611

lol, I wish I had finished reading the thread before my last post

I think both sides are asshats. I just personally find what the GOP is doing distasteful. There are ways to do things and this is not a way to do things.

 

+1,000,000