Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

The US Government Shut-Down - Whom to Blame

Page 7 of 23 [ 361 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 23  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,586
Location: the island of defective toy santas

02 Oct 2013, 11:26 pm

Vigilans wrote:
A lot of these guys are simply unelectable without rigging the system through partisan redistricting. The Southern Dems have done it too but not nearly as prolifically as the Republicans

and we let this happen. this country is DONE, stick a fork in it.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,659
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

02 Oct 2013, 11:27 pm

eric76 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
No, he doesn't. The Republicans are acting like spoiled, vindictive children in this matter. They had lost the election, but still strive to make this president's legacy a failure. That's what destroying Obamacare is really all about, and thus the government shutdown, too.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


You do realize, don't you, that the Republicans won quite a number of Congressional races. Are you suggesting that our elected representatives should forget about their principles and vote for whatever the President says?

When George Bush was President, were you of the opinion that the Democrats in Congress who opposed him and his plans should have just done whatever he wanted them to do?

Or does that only apply to Republicans when a Democrat was elected President and not to Democrats when a Republican is elected President?


I never said they couldn't oppose the President's plans, but I expect them to behave like adults and professionals. And I don't recall Democrats trying to delegitimize Bush the way Republicans - even in the Senate and Congress - are with this President.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,586
Location: the island of defective toy santas

02 Oct 2013, 11:31 pm

the worst part about what the TP are doing, is that their refusal to play fair ruins the game for everybody else. it forces a race to the bottom just to survive.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

02 Oct 2013, 11:33 pm

auntblabby wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
A lot of these guys are simply unelectable without rigging the system through partisan redistricting. The Southern Dems have done it too but not nearly as prolifically as the Republicans

and we let this happen. this country is DONE, stick a fork in it.


Not necessarily, its possible to hand redistricting off to non partisan committees as has been done elsewhere in the world. I think it may even have happened in some parts of the US. You're living through the Second Gilded Age, it will end at some point. Whether it is followed by prosperity or worse is up in the air but don't lose hope, America has a strong foundation


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

02 Oct 2013, 11:35 pm

LKL wrote:
eric76 wrote:

They are at a bit of an impasse. One side wants changes and the other refuses to even think of changing anything.

In any event, this isn't a budget, it is a continuing resolution to fund the government in the absence of a budget.

Actually, that's not quite true; the impasse isn't about 'changes' to the law, it's about defunding the law entirely.


I am under the impression that there have been a number of cases in the past where a law was passed but the funds to operate the programs the law created are never provided or at far, far lower amounts than expected.

A separate issue is unfunded mandates where Congress passes a bill and the President signs it into law that leave it up to others to pay for the bill.

And then there are instances in which Congress will pass bills that the President signs but limits the enforcement of those laws by the use of signing statements.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,586
Location: the island of defective toy santas

02 Oct 2013, 11:35 pm

Vigilans wrote:
Not necessarily, its possible to hand redistricting off to non partisan committees as has been done elsewhere in the world. I think it may even have happened in some parts of the US. You're living through the Second Gilded Age, it will end at some point. Whether it is followed by prosperity or worse is up in the air but don't lose hope, America has a strong foundation

I sure hope you're right and enough Americans form a critical mass demanding change.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,659
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

02 Oct 2013, 11:38 pm

auntblabby wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
Not necessarily, its possible to hand redistricting off to non partisan committees as has been done elsewhere in the world. I think it may even have happened in some parts of the US. You're living through the Second Gilded Age, it will end at some point. Whether it is followed by prosperity or worse is up in the air but don't lose hope, America has a strong foundation

I sure hope you're right and enough Americans form a critical mass demanding change.


Once people get it out of their thick skulls that the tea party represents a populist movement for reform, maybe we can have a real people's movement.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

02 Oct 2013, 11:42 pm

If the government shuts down completely people won't be getting their social security checks.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

02 Oct 2013, 11:44 pm

Vigilans wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
eric76 wrote:
You do realize, don't you, that the Republicans won quite a number of Congressional races.


Gotta love gerrymandering. Politician choose you!

:oops: in that case we have met the enemy, and he is us.


A lot of these guys are simply unelectable without rigging the system through partisan redistricting. The Southern Dems have done it too but not nearly as prolifically as the Republicans


That goes both ways. Just as district lines have been drawn with the intention of keeping Republican politicians in office, they have also been drawn with the intention of keeping Democratic politicians in office. I don't know where you get your data, but I would be hard pressed to find any one party to have had a clearcut lead in such districts. In reality, I think that it really depends on which party leads in the state. In states that are mostly Democrat, most, if not all, of the redistricting is going to benefit the Democrats. In states that are mostly Republican, it is going to be the Republicans who benefit. If you think that Republicans are the greatest beneficiaries from the practice in Democratic states, then you are truly delusional.

All things considered, if I had to bet on which party in Texas has benefited the most from the practice over time, it is extraordinarily clear that it would be the Democrats, not the Republicans. I would be surprised if it were much different, if any different, in other southern states. It wasn't all that long ago that the Republicans didn't have much presence in the southern states.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

02 Oct 2013, 11:46 pm

androbot2084 wrote:
If the government shuts down completely people won't be getting their social security checks.


I have news for you -- only about 15% of the government is reported to be shut down. If people stop receiving their social security checks, it is going to be due to the executive branch trying to maximize the pain so that they can direct the blame at the Republicans.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,659
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

02 Oct 2013, 11:50 pm

eric76 wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
eric76 wrote:
You do realize, don't you, that the Republicans won quite a number of Congressional races.


Gotta love gerrymandering. Politician choose you!

:oops: in that case we have met the enemy, and he is us.


A lot of these guys are simply unelectable without rigging the system through partisan redistricting. The Southern Dems have done it too but not nearly as prolifically as the Republicans


That goes both ways. Just as district lines have been drawn with the intention of keeping Republican politicians in office, they have also been drawn with the intention of keeping Democratic politicians in office. I don't know where you get your data, but I would be hard pressed to find any one party to have had a clearcut lead in such districts. In reality, I think that it really depends on which party leads in the state. In states that are mostly Democrat, most, if not all, of the redistricting is going to benefit the Democrats. In states that are mostly Republican, it is going to be the Republicans who benefit. If you think that Republicans are the greatest beneficiaries from the practice in Democratic states, then you are truly delusional.

All things considered, if I had to bet on which party in Texas has benefited the most from the practice over time, it is extraordinarily clear that it would be the Democrats, not the Republicans. I would be surprised if it were much different, if any different, in other southern states. It wasn't all that long ago that the Republicans didn't have much presence in the southern states.


The Republicans didn't have much of a presence in southern states in the past until white southerners had left the Democratic party in droves due to Lyndon Johnson's civil rights legislation.
And actually, there had been a Republican party in the south - it's just that it had at one time been filled with blacks, being the party of Lincoln, after all. That is, again, till civil rights became a Democratic cause.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

03 Oct 2013, 12:04 am

eric76 wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
eric76 wrote:
You do realize, don't you, that the Republicans won quite a number of Congressional races.


Gotta love gerrymandering. Politician choose you!

:oops: in that case we have met the enemy, and he is us.


A lot of these guys are simply unelectable without rigging the system through partisan redistricting. The Southern Dems have done it too but not nearly as prolifically as the Republicans


That goes both ways. Just as district lines have been drawn with the intention of keeping Republican politicians in office, they have also been drawn with the intention of keeping Democratic politicians in office. I don't know where you get your data, but I would be hard pressed to find any one party to have had a clearcut lead in such districts. In reality, I think that it really depends on which party leads in the state. In states that are mostly Democrat, most, if not all, of the redistricting is going to benefit the Democrats. In states that are mostly Republican, it is going to be the Republicans who benefit. If you think that Republicans are the greatest beneficiaries from the practice in Democratic states, then you are truly delusional.

All things considered, if I had to bet on which party in Texas has benefited the most from the practice over time, it is extraordinarily clear that it would be the Democrats, not the Republicans. I would be surprised if it were much different, if any different, in other southern states. It wasn't all that long ago that the Republicans didn't have much presence in the southern states.


I think independent redistricting committees are needed, gerrymandering is an offence to the democratic process regardless which party you believe does it more


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

03 Oct 2013, 12:09 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
eric76 wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
eric76 wrote:
You do realize, don't you, that the Republicans won quite a number of Congressional races.


Gotta love gerrymandering. Politician choose you!

:oops: in that case we have met the enemy, and he is us.


A lot of these guys are simply unelectable without rigging the system through partisan redistricting. The Southern Dems have done it too but not nearly as prolifically as the Republicans


That goes both ways. Just as district lines have been drawn with the intention of keeping Republican politicians in office, they have also been drawn with the intention of keeping Democratic politicians in office. I don't know where you get your data, but I would be hard pressed to find any one party to have had a clearcut lead in such districts. In reality, I think that it really depends on which party leads in the state. In states that are mostly Democrat, most, if not all, of the redistricting is going to benefit the Democrats. In states that are mostly Republican, it is going to be the Republicans who benefit. If you think that Republicans are the greatest beneficiaries from the practice in Democratic states, then you are truly delusional.

All things considered, if I had to bet on which party in Texas has benefited the most from the practice over time, it is extraordinarily clear that it would be the Democrats, not the Republicans. I would be surprised if it were much different, if any different, in other southern states. It wasn't all that long ago that the Republicans didn't have much presence in the southern states.


The Republicans didn't have much of a presence in southern states in the past until white southerners had left the Democratic party in droves due to Lyndon Johnson's civil rights legislation.
And actually, there had been a Republican party in the south - it's just that it had at one time been filled with blacks, being the party of Lincoln, after all. That is, again, till civil rights became a Democratic cause.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


In Texas, it was much later than that before the Republicans started taking hold. Before Reagan was elected President, there weren't that many.

In the 1976 primaries, I was at Texas A&M University. I showed up to vote and found an enormous line that would take at least an hour to vote, maybe two hours, at the Democratic Primary and absolutely no line at the Republican Primary. So I decided to vote in the Republican Primary. I walked into the room, got my ballot, voted, and left. Total time was about two or three minutes.

And don't forget that the noted Republican Phil Gramm wasn't even a Republican until after he was in Congress.

In my county, the Republican Party rarely held primaries until sometime in the 1980s.
That sure changed in a hurry -- the Democratic Party hasn't bothered to hold primaries in nearly twenty years now.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,659
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

03 Oct 2013, 12:17 am

Needless to say, it to a while for all white southerners to forget that the Republicans had been their Civil War enemies.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

03 Oct 2013, 12:26 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
Needless to say, it to a while for all white southerners to forget that the Republicans had been their Civil War enemies.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The Republicans certainly didn't treat the citizens in the southern states at all well after the civil war. I was extremely surprised when Clements was elected governor. I swore up and down before the elections that Texans would never vote for another Republican for Governor.

We went over 100 years with the Democrats having solid control of the state.

What happened wasn't that Texas moved away from the Democratic Party but that the Democratic Party moved away from Texas.



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

03 Oct 2013, 12:29 am

The whole south flipped. Not exactly new information. The party of Lincoln became the party of southern resentment toward the federal government.