Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
What is more important: keeping the government running or funding obamacare?
assuming the hysteria over government shutdown would actually occur....
What is more important: keeping the government running or funding obamacare?
assuming the hysteria over government shutdown would actually occur....
George Bush raised the debt ceiling 7 times to Obama's 3 (and Bush should be dinged with an 8th debt ceiling increase because his budget was in force during Obama's first year).
Once the Democratic party realized they had been fed false intelligence over the Iraq War, and once the war became unpopular with the American people, the Democratic House wanted to end it. But because it was legally passed, they accepted it. ObamaCare was legally passed.
Ronald Reagan raised the debt ceiling 17 times.
Bush 41 raised the debt ceiling 7 times.
We never heard a peep from Republicans about spending.
Reagan tripled Carter's spending.
Bush doubled Clinton's spending - and turned a balanced budget into historic deficits.
We never heard a peep from Republicans about spending.
The Democratic House under Reagan vehemently disagreed with Reagan's failed "Star Wars" project, which saddled the taxpayer with massive debt. Tip O'neill did not want to fund it. He knew it was a technological impossibility, and a give-away to GOP Weapons donors. Yet he never held the nation hostage to Reagan's historic spending and deficits.
Tip O'neill let Reagan raise the debt ceiling 17 times with some of the most irresponsible spending in U.S. history - and it injured him politically, but he never held the nation hostage, even after Reagan was terribly weakened b/c of initial reports of Iran-Contra that began surfacing prior to being officially investigated in 1988. Under Carter, Tip O'neill and the Democratic House spent a third less as compared to the spending Reagan demanded. Why don't people like you know history?
How do you conclude that?Which you weren’t required to do given the question’s partisan idiocy.
another liberal coward
it is a simple question based on the claim by you libs that the pubs are holding the government hostage, yet, when the question is actually posed to you, you claim it is idiotic, yet...you continue the stupid dishonest claim the pubs are holding the gov hostage
pound sand
It is the GOP causing all of this uncertainty.
another liberal coward
it is a simple question based on the claim by you libs that the pubs are holding the government hostage, yet, when the question is actually posed to you, you claim it is idiotic, yet...you continue the stupid dishonest claim the pubs are holding the gov hostage
pound sand
It is the GOP causing all of this uncertaintyHow do you conclude that?.
The ACA is law. The GOP House passed a bill that doesn't fund the law... It would be like not funding the NEA because you don't like it, or the M1-A1 because you don't like it.
The GOP and Dems don't have a role according to our Constitution. The House passed a budget bill that doesn't fund the government. The Senate needn't worry about it. What's next? A bill not allowing the Senate to run heaters or have Internet access?The GOP and the HOUSE have acted. The uncertainty stems from the Democrats and the Senate attempting to obstruct a positive outcome for this country.
Again, the bill is not worth consideration until it funds the Government.I find it funny that no one on your side speaks to the fact that it is the Democrats who are saying no. They refuse to even work with the GOP, yet like good little marionettes, you people keep spewing the "GOP is obstructionist" meme.
Here is an idea.
Take the bill that has been voted on by the House, debate it on the floor of the Senate, and then hold an up or down vote.
Afraid that the country will see the Democrats for what they are?
I'll agree with you on that one. Nothing wrong with finding out where everyone stands. I'm actually in favor of getting rid of the Senate all together.
...WHAT is it with some of you folks that screw up quotes? GO FIGURE...Corrected.How do you conclude that?It is the GOP causing all of this uncertainty.
The ACA is law. The GOP House passed a bill that doesn't fund the law... It would be like not funding the NEA because you don't like it, or the M1-A1 because you don't like it.
The GOP and Dems don't have a role according to our Constitution. The House passed a budget bill that doesn't fund the government. The Senate needn't worry about it. What's next? A bill not allowing the Senate to run heaters or have Internet access?
Again, the bill is not worth consideration until it funds the Government.
Here is an idea.
Take the bill that has been voted on by the House, debate it on the floor of the Senate, and then hold an up or down vote.
Afraid that the country will see the Democrats for what they are?
I'll agree with you on that one. Nothing wrong with finding out where everyone stands. I'm actually in favor of getting rid of the Senate all together.
NO. The Republicans care about ENDING one program more than they care about all of the rest of the government.
If a Republican were president, and the Democrats said, we're going to shut down the government if the universal background check gun law isn't passed,
you're trying to tell us you'd side with the Democrats,
on principle?
Fuck off. lol
wow....what a hissy fit.
liberals are about ENDING ALL GOVERNMENT in order to save one program that is not even implemented yet
fuck off. lol
You voted in your own poll that it is more important to keep the government running.
Therefore, you cannot support the Republicans putting a specific partisan condition on keeping the government running,
because by doing so they are saying they are willing to keep the government from running, they are willing to shut down the government,
if their condition isn't met.
The act of putting conditions on whether or not the government will be shut down is taking the position that keeping the government running is not the more important of the two.
What is more important: keeping the government running or funding obamacare?
assuming the hysteria over government shutdown would actually occur....
What is more important: keeping the government running or funding obamacare?
assuming the hysteria over government shutdown would actually occur....
Health Care Reform is the means to "keep the gov't running."
without an alternative to ACA the Republicans are doing neither.
What is more important: keeping the government running or funding obamacare?
assuming the hysteria over government shutdown would actually occur....
Health Care Reform is the means to "keep the gov't running."
without an alternative to ACA the Republicans are doing neither.
Remember back when it was "repeal and replace"? Now it's just repeal. The GOP, sadly, has taken the tract of trying to have us believe that healthcare isn't broken.
Really, when was the last time you heard Boehner talk about the GOP plan? Apparently this is the GOP plan:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRnYlQmR1eQ]Amber Tamblyn and David Cross- Gynotician - YouTube[/ame]
What is more important: keeping the government running or funding obamacare?
assuming the hysteria over government shutdown would actually occur....
Health Care Reform is the means to "keep the gov't running."
without an alternative to ACA the Republicans are doing neither.
It's not an either..or..
ObamaCare is the law.
And a part of the government.