ch: Okay, so Obama saying he will veto cancer treatment for children is because we can't allow Republicans to get away with a shutdown?
Another obfuscating tactic of yours -- attempting to reframe another person's arguments and demanding that your reframing be the basis upon which the debate takes place.
No, it's not just "we can't allow the Republicans to get way with shutdown," as if it were merely Democratic pique at a one-off tactic by the Republicans. It's "we can't reward the use of a tactic that would derail any future governance." If this succeeds as a tactic for the Republicans negotiating cuts in other programs that they wanted anyway, there's no reason to believe it won't be done by the Republicans again, and again, and again. The rest of Obama's presidency -- and for that matter, any future governance by a Democrat the Tea Party contingent dislikes -- would be paralyzed. And no, this piecemeal approach to funding, even without strings attached, is no way to run a government.
ch: I get what you are saying Paft, but you are leaving out the mechanisms in why refusing kids cancer treatment....
Reframe, reframe, reframe... Sorry Cheezy, but I'm going to have to insist on the discussion sticking to what's actually going on here. First of all, it's the Republicans shutting down the government that has blocked these kids from cancer treatment, so let's stop pretending it's the Democrats who caused them to be turned away. Second, whether or not the Republicans have strings attached to that particular funding is beside the point. They are trying to fundamentally and radically change the way this country is run. That has to be stopped.
no subject
Another obfuscating tactic of yours -- attempting to reframe another person's arguments and demanding that your reframing be the basis upon which the debate takes place.
No, it's not just "we can't allow the Republicans to get way with shutdown," as if it were merely Democratic pique at a one-off tactic by the Republicans. It's "we can't reward the use of a tactic that would derail any future governance." If this succeeds as a tactic for the Republicans negotiating cuts in other programs that they wanted anyway, there's no reason to believe it won't be done by the Republicans again, and again, and again. The rest of Obama's presidency -- and for that matter, any future governance by a Democrat the Tea Party contingent dislikes -- would be paralyzed. And no, this piecemeal approach to funding, even without strings attached, is no way to run a government.
ch: I get what you are saying Paft, but you are leaving out the mechanisms in why refusing kids cancer treatment....
Reframe, reframe, reframe... Sorry Cheezy, but I'm going to have to insist on the discussion sticking to what's actually going on here. First of all, it's the Republicans shutting down the government that has blocked these kids from cancer treatment, so let's stop pretending it's the Democrats who caused them to be turned away. Second, whether or not the Republicans have strings attached to that particular funding is beside the point. They are trying to fundamentally and radically change the way this country is run. That has to be stopped.