-
@sunny: we are kind of seeing the results of three parties if you think about it. The tea party is essentially holding the republican party hostage. I'm fine with more parties as long as their goal is not one of obstruction.
-
@Mrs. Jacks: The tea party is a very conservative group. I am definitely NOT considering them when I talk about a third party in politics. They're obviously not helping anything. But, the Libertarians are more towards the liberal side (with also conservative views), so encouraging it might be better than encouraging the tea party. The tea party bugs me.
It's also important to know that the Republicans aren't wanting to completely get rid of the ACA, just some parts of it. I think their timing is bad, and they should get back to work, and then deal with those parts, though. I'm ok with healthcare reform, but some of the stuff on the ACA we could do without.
-
@Dandelion: it depends on which republicans you talk to. The house has voted in total 42 times to repeal the bill altogether. I'm no fan of libertarianism as I believe in government. We absolutely need regulations for civil rights, big business, and a social compact to take care of the least fortunate among us.
If you look at libertarians like rand Paul, he's made his stance on these issues very clear. So I'm not buying the argument for libertarians in government. Personal life-- sure, but not for government.
-
@Dandelion: I watched an interview with a Tea Party spokesperson, she was not an elected official. She said the Tea Party's only aim was taxes and spending. When I think of conservatives I think of fiscally conservative and morally conservative. At one point she was asked about a social issue and had absolutely no opinion on the matter. Are you just meaning fiscally conservative when you call the Tea Party concervative too?
-
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: I think they're radically conservative. I don't like politicians who are radically on either the left or the right. I think as a whole, they're more fiscally conservative, but there are plenty in there that are conservative all around.
-
I think the republicans aren't doing themselves any favors. I think if they think Obamacare is going to be so harmful (and I kinda agree, but that's besides this point), then they should let it go and watch it crash so that they can say they were right. If that happens, it'll make their ratings go up. If not, they were wrong and the country has good healthcare. They're killing their ratings doing it this way.
-
I think everyone is to blame.
-
@littlek: I worry about "false-equivalencies" because sometimes there is a right and wrong and there needs to be accountability for that. Blanket statements of everyone does it or everyone is wrong doesn't allow for accountability.
-
@Mrs. Jacks: I'm conservative so you are not going to like my answer. I think the republicans and democrats need to work together to come up with a plan that makes sense. I'm personally against Obamacare.
-
@littlek: I live in a conservative state that is anti-ACA, so I get that, but to hold the rest of the government hostage to try and get at the ACA seems irresponsible to me. ACA isn't even part of the general budget.
We litigated his with the original ACA vote, the supreme court decision, the 2012 election, and 42 attempts at repeal in the house. You may not like that (and it certainly isn't perfect), but the people have spoken time and again.. So for republicans to demand that changes to ACA to be part of the continuing resolution seems way out of bounds. To me that doesn't constitute equal blame!
-
@littlek: what parts don't you like?
-
@Mrs. Jacks: Agree re: holding hostage.. it's not an issue that they don't like the ACA; but the time to vote and change the terms is over. They voted it into law what makes them think they can change everything now? I don't understand..
-
For those interested, here's a story on the inner workings of this shutdown and how the strategy has been months in the making. Spoiler alert - the Koch brothers are involved.
-
@littlek: it doesn't matter what a person's stance on The ACA is:)
The issue on hand is *not* obamacare.
The issue is this:
"Obamacare" (The ACA) is a living, bonafide law. To fund it is not negotiable as it is now regarded under "mandatory funding". Congress voted & it passed & now they decide to get up in arms?
Not only that, but now the issue is huge & harming so many government employees and other citizens that depend on funding, such as mothers who depend on WIC to purchase food for their babies.
Whether or not you agree with obamacare is moot. What the tea party is doing is in bad faith. -
@hummusgirl: thanks for the article.
I may be over sensitive about this, but all this anti- ACA/ anti-Obamacare just seems very personal and is really just anti-Obama. To go through these lenghths to repeal a law and before the Supreme Court ruling there were calls of impeachment just shows this is not entirely about a piece of legislation its about the man.
@Dagret: Your ILs are exactly these people that cannot get pass the man to see how the law benefits him. I hope all these other anti-Obama, anti-ACA people leave the money and benefits at the table. Stop trying to ruin it for everyone just because you're mad President Obama is the president.
-
@TurtleDoves: @Mrs. Lemon-Lime: My biggest issue with the ACA is calling it a "Law of the Land" when people are exempt from it. I could be wrong, but I have not heard of any other federal law allowing certain people to not have to follow it. I take issue with it being called a law.
-
@TurtleDoves: Yes, this! The scariest thing about this is the precedent it would set if the fringe Tea Partiers are successful. If a small group of people can essentially hijack the democratic process and block a law from taking effect because they don't like it, then how can we trust our system at all, our electoral process, checks and balances, etc.? It's a disturbing proposition and has nothing at all to do with the ACA.
-
@Dandelion: I'm not sure what you're referring to but the rumor that Congress is exempt from the ACA appears to be untrue:
http://blogs.rgj.com/factchecker/2013/09/28/is-congress-exempted-from-obamacare/ -
@Dandelion: http://www.advisory.com/Daily-Briefing/2013/06/27/Who-will-be-exempt-from-the-ACA-mandate-The-final-list
Exempt: very low-income people, Native Americans because they have ttheir own system, people who don't have a plan in they're state, and those who the ACA is not actually affordable vased on the goal the ACA should cost no more than 9.5% of income. .Did this article miss any exempt populations?
Would you rather an insurance plan via ACA become a hardship for a family? Eating up too much of their income or forcing them to decide between food and insurance?
Every law has exemptions ie school vaccines, or the tax system.
-
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: Some people will have to make that choice. It's not making insurance affordable for everyone. The states that don't expand their medicaid system will have people in the little in between bracket where they are poor, but won't get any help and will have to pay full price for their health insurance.
There's too much imposition on employers, also, making people have cut hours and higher premiums. The ACA is great for a lot of people, but it's been harmful to a lot of people, too. We can't just say, "oh well" for them.
-
@Dandelion: Trust me, the ACA is TERRIBLE for my family. My entire family works in the medical field (doctors, administration, owners, investors..) but, we are not the majority and The ACA is helping the majority of the American people. That is bigger than me.
And by the way, many laws, many, many do not affect all people, and yet they are laws. Think Medicare, Medicaid....
And those are uncontested.
Either way: this discussion has never been "Are you pro ACA?"
It is simply:
Is what the Tea Party has done in bad faith? It is following good American process? Is it in the best interest of the majority of Americans?
And no, it is not. -
@TurtleDoves: Oh, I agree with that. I think this is a wrong place, wrong time situation. Like I said above, if they think it's such a bad idea, then they should let it go on, so that they can say "told you so" instead of trying to shut it down in the first place.
-
@Dandelion: And that's true. No one (in this specific discussion) should be concerned with whether or not ACA is fabulous or not. The point is, there is a legislative process and I feel that that process has been disrespected. No consideration is being taken on what is best for the majority of the people and it is a power pull. I feel that the American people are getting the short end of this big mess & that sucks. Big time.
-
I just read something I had to share because it's made me so furious. Sen. Richard Burr of NC said, "You’ve had the federal government out of work for close to two weeks; that’s about $24 billion a month. Every month, you have enough saved in salaries alone that you’re covering three-fifths, four-fifths of the total debt service, about $35 billion a month. That’s manageable for some time."
Every time I think it can't get worse or more ridiculous it does. I'm a DC native and I know a ton of people not getting paid right now, including my own father. Is he seriously suggesting that we use the salaries of hard-working Americans to cover our country's debts? That we should take advantage of the fact that people aren't getting paid because the GOP is acting like a bunch of children throwing a tantrum? There are people out there, people I KNOW, who are struggling to pay rent, pay their mortgages, put FOOD on the table, and he has the nerve to say that? Oh, well done. You solved it. Let's just not pay people and use their money to fix our nation's problems. I'm so glad you can find a better use for federal employees' salaries than, I don't know, FEEDING THEIR CHILDREN. This disgusts me.
- Google Plus
- Stumbleupon
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Pinterest
- Favorite0
143 comments