Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Has the rampant looting and the fall of the cities begun yet?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit It's been going for quite some time

 motyak wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Has the rampant looting and the fall of the cities begun yet?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit It's been going for quite some time

Yes but that was by the rich, who own the government.

 Andrew1975 wrote:
They ought to do this like the Vatican, Lock them in until they can get it done. I say take it a few steps further.
After one day, no pay
After 2 days no access to the outside world (tv, internet, phones)
Day three, no food or water including showers and toilets
Day four, start bringing them sharp sticks.

I was watching the whole "Green eggs and ham" filibuster the other day. Don't they see how stupid that makes us as a society look, that our politicians can and do play such childish games?

At least English parliament is entertaining.

Nah... lock them in the room w/o food.

Then get the Choom Gang back together and blow Weed smoke in both chambers. Their Muchies would be so over powering, they'd settle their differences and pass a compromise!

But, hey... during the shutdown:
-So 90% of IRS workers are now furloughed.. Conservative groups can feel safer from IRS harassment

-Welcome to the #governmentshutdown ! Or as we like to call it - basically Saturday.

-Will the sun come up tomorrow? WE DON'T KNOW #ShutNado

-Leno: We've had 17 govt shutdowns since 1976. The longest was those four years during Jimmy Carter's presidency.

-ANARCHY IN NYC!! PPL DRINKING BIG GULPS IN THE STREETS! BLOOMBERG "HIGHY CONCERNED"

- With Dept of Education closed - kids will be able to pray, eat meat and learn about American Exceptionalism.

-I'm putting in 100 watt bulbs! GOVERNMENT SHUT DOWN CAN'T STOP ME

-PRISM: Government shutdown! I'm in total control now. Have no fear. HA HA HA HA HA

-Hey remember when Dan Rather & Sam Donaldson were calling Tip O'Neill a terrorist for shutting the gov down 8x under Reagan? Me neither...

Some Republicans are not towing the outrageous party line that Democrats are forcing the shutdown. Even though this revolt ultimately failed, I hope it will send a message. The GOP cannot continue down this road and remain viable.

Moderate House Republicans failed to line up votes for separate plan

Moderate House Republicans who wanted to fund the government with no strings attached failed to line up votes against a House GOP plan to renew federal coffers while chipping away at Obamacare.

Rep. Charlie Dent, R-Pennsylvania, Rep. Peter King, R-New York, and others feverishly made calls to stage what would have been effectively a revolt.

They said they were hoping there were enough GOP members like them who were fed up with the tactics of the leadership that they can find enough votes to defeat the first procedural measure, known as the rule.

That would have prevented the House GOP leadership from even bringing their plan up at all. Because the moderate Republicans failed to generate enough support, the broader GOP bill that includes anti-Obamacare provisions will now go to a final vote.

Given the makeup of the GOP caucus, the House Republican moderates needed 17 Republicans to agree to defy their leadership, and be willing to face what will undoubtedly be the wrath of the conservative grassroots.

"We have people in the conference, I believe, who'd be just as happy to have the government shutdown," King said. "They live in these narrow echochambers. They listen to themselves and their tea party friends. That keeps them going, forgetting that the rest of the country thinks we're crazy."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/30/first-on-cnn-moderate-house-republicans-working-to-line-up-votes-on-their-own-plan/?hpt=po_c2

 whembly wrote:
I actually agree with that tactic moreso that what's going on now...

Know why? Because it's actually happening now. Easy decision.

However, the Republicans (and Democrats) are beholden to their constituents.

Yeah, and so they should attempt repeal, and cast their vote in that direction every time it comes up. And if they win that sooner or later, well that's democracy. But you don't threaten to do something nobody wants to get the other side to give up a bill they lawfully passed. That's just straight up extortion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
"Blow up the economy"?

o.O

Are you saying that a Federal Bureaucracy is the sole reason that this economy is functioning? Even if that's true... what does that tell you?

To clarify - when I talk about blowing up the economy I'm talking about the debt ceiling. Government shut down is stupid and pointless, but it isn't on the scale as the debt ceiling.

Stability is the cornerstone of any first world economy. It's one of the biggest parts (along with first class education and infrastructure) that basically makes a country first world.

Having one party declare that they refuse to raise the debt ceiling and therefore basically default on bonds that fall due... that's about the most unstable thing a first world country has ever willfully chosen to do. If you don't think that will flow through the market in a catastrophic way, well then okay.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
Uh no... that was the byproduct of the superior Clinton engine. Really... Bill Clinton is a fething awesome politician. Like Obama... only better.

The Clinton machine was impressive, but in 1995 it was running up against the narrative of movement conservatism at its most potent, and the polls were not pretty for Democrats.

The Republicans simply over-reached with the shut down, and it cost them all the momentum they had gained up until that point.

And the current GOP has nothing like the potency of message that they had in 1995. This will likely only hurt more.

That said, the hurt to Republican votes will be at the general, and that's a competitive race for scarily few House of Reps seats. One big reason this nonsense is continuing is because the Tea Party love it, and those guys show up in droves at Republican primaries.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Andrew1975 wrote:
They ought to do this like the Vatican, Lock them in until they can get it done. I say take it a few steps further.
After one day, no pay
After 2 days no access to the outside world (tv, internet, phones)
Day three, no food or water including showers and toilets
Day four, start bringing them sharp sticks.

That only works when there's two sides genuinely arguing for things they want, so that a negotiation will deliver a middle ground in which both sides get something they want.

Here we have Republicans threatening to do something nobody wants (shut down government and/or hit the debt ceiling), and they'll only agree to not do it if Democrats concede some stuff to them. That isn't a negotiation, it's a hostage crisis, and you don't set about finding a middle ground in that situation, because then they'll just go and find another hostage later on to force you to give up more stuff.

 djones520 wrote:
Well, I'm fully putting the blame on the Democrats for this one.

The Republicans have sent several things to them. Remove Obamacare. Push it back a bit. Just pull this tax out of it. They keep giving ground, trying to find a middle ground. Hell, they are DOING something.

Dems in the Senate are refusing to make any budge though. Our way or the highway is it for them. Remember, this is the guy who even before the election vowed that he would not make any attempt at all to work with Romney should he win.

This sort of thing is actually quite hilarious from an external perspective. Once you get outside the narrative of the US news media, it's pretty evident that there's one major problem in US democracy; the Republican party(the Dems aren't perfect by a long shot, but the vast majority of the obstructionism, baseless partisan critique, and sheer Please don't try and bypass the language filter like this. Reds8n insanity is coming straight out of GOP HQ).

"Obamacare" is a perfect example. It's a Republican construct, one adopted by the Democrats because they foolishly believed that abandoning their far more comprehensive plans for healthcare reform in favour of a policy which originated within the opposition party would prevent any undue controversy or obstructiveness on the part of their political opponents. "Obamacare" was the compromise, but as usual the Democrats woefully underestimated the lengths some factions within the Republican party will go to in order to avoid even the most modest of cooperation or good faith debate. The moment the system was adopted as policy by the Obama administration, it became "Obamacare", and so began the endless cycle of scare-stories about "death panels", mass-redundancies, the implosion of the nation's entire fiscal system, about how this was the first step in Chairman Osama Sadam Hussein Maobamastalin's seizure of power in order to found his Communist Stalinist Fascist Nazi state where everyone's guns would be taken away and children would be forced to wear miniature Solyndra wind-turbines on their heads.

You talk about finding a middle-ground - the Republican party's position and rhetoric are so far away from the middle-ground that they're in geostationary orbit above the middle-ground's moon; "Obamacare" is already a horrible amalgam of previously-Republican party policy and repeated compromises in the Republicans' favour, if the Democrats give any more ground they'll have given all of it.

 Yodhrin wrote:
This sort of thing is actually quite hilarious from an external perspective. Once you get outside the narrative of the US news media, it's pretty evident that there's one major problem in US democracy; the Republican party(the Dems aren't perfect by a long shot, but the vast majority of the obstructionism, baseless partisan critique, and sheer bat insanity is coming straight out of GOP HQ).

At present.

You guys must have awfully short memories.

"Obamacare" is a perfect example. It's a Republican construct, one adopted by the Democrats because they foolishly believed that abandoning their far more comprehensive plans for healthcare reform in favour of a policy which originated within the opposition party would prevent any undue controversy or obstructiveness on the part of their political opponents.

That's one (incorrect) way of looking at it. Another is that it was a desperate attempt to appear bipartisan, because they lacked the balls to push for what they actually wanted and get saddled with the blame if it turned out not to be paradise.

You talk about finding a middle-ground - the Republican party's position and rhetoric are so far away from the middle-ground that they're in geostationary orbit above the middle-ground's moon; "Obamacare" is already a horrible amalgam of previously-Republican party policy and repeated compromises in the Republicans' favour, if the Democrats give any more ground they'll have given all of it.

If you're further to the left than the Democrats, I'm sure that looks perfectly true.

If you're not, it looks like a monumental pile of bs.

They (the Democrats) pushed for a more comprehensive healthcare system in the 90s. Hillary Clinton was in charge.

TBH every major political party in Europe is more leftwing than the Democrats.

 Seaward wrote:
At present.

You guys must have awfully short memories.

No, I just think that you deal with the problem you have now. That the two parties have been varying levels of insane at different times really only matter for flag waving exercises. Right now its the Republicans who are deeply crazy, and as such, they're the problem that needs fixing.

At some time in the distant future when the Democrats get taken over by some brand of insanity well then we'll worry about them, and try to figure out ways to make sure their crazy doesn't feth up the country.

I don't think they're crazy, I think they're foolishly playing a losing hand. I'm as sympathetic to the goal of killing off Obamacare as anyone, but the only way the shutdown scheme works is if it goes on for long enough that people stop caring who started it and become interested solely in who's willing to deal to end it.

 Seaward wrote:
I don't think they're crazy, I think they're foolishly playing a losing hand.

Nah, there is a serious strain of crazy going through the Republicans. I mean, the other day Ari Fleischer somehow concluded that Obama was allowed more than 140 letters per tweet, and went off on a rant about, which was only retracted when it turned out he couldn't count. There's now polls in which Republicans are saying that they believe Obama is allowed more letters per tweet than other people.

That's a really, really minor thing that only stuck in my head because its funny, but its reflective of how silly internal discussion when things like that aren't just laughed at.

I'm as sympathetic to the goal of killing off Obamacare as anyone, but the only way the shutdown scheme works is if it goes on for long enough that people stop caring who started it and become interested solely in who's willing to deal to end it.

There are ways and means to pursue policy objectives. Threatening shut down and hitting the debt ceiling to get the other side to cave is terrible governance.

Michael Bay's highly insightful political allegory The Rock is actually all about the threat to hit the debt ceiling (also Michael Bay is a time traveller). You have a sympathetic cause (well sympathetic to Michael Bay, he's a bit right wing as well), but Ed Harris, who represents Boehner, attempts to achieve his aim through bad means - taking some people hostage and hoping the other side will cave. When the bluff is called, Harris backs down but his bad policy has handed power to people who really are crazy enough to go through with it, and it's only because Sean Connery can beat up elite soldiers despite being about 70 years old that tragedy is averted. Obama, despite being much younger than Connery and therefore much more likely to win a fistfight, is nowhere near as cool as Connery and this won't be solved by throwing Eric Cantor off the top of Alcatraz.

I'm not sure if Nicholas Cage is Biden or Reid...

 sebster wrote:
Nah, there is a serious strain of crazy going through the Republicans. I mean, the other day Ari Fleischer somehow concluded that Obama was allowed more than 140 letters per tweet, and went off on a rant about, which was only retracted when it turned out he couldn't count. There's now polls in which Republicans are saying that they believe Obama is allowed more letters per tweet than other people.

That's a really, really minor thing that only stuck in my head because its funny, but its reflective of how silly internal discussion when things like that aren't just laughed at.

I thought the same about the, "Bush secretly organized 9/11" stuff that made up a significant minority of Democratic thought processes, much less the "Bush intentionally lied about Iraq!" stuff. It seems throwing anything you can think of, no matter how patently insane, and seeing if it'll gain traction is part and parcel with being the party not in power now.

There are ways and means to pursue policy objectives. Threatening shut down and hitting the debt ceiling to get the other side to cave is terrible governance.

I don't necessarily agree. If all you've got to threaten with is a shutdown, then there's no getting around that's all you've got to threaten with. I think the Republicans would answer that Obamacare itself is terrible governance, and between letting it get permanently installed and shutting the government down for a couple days, letting it get permanently installed is the greater evil.

I think it's a dumb strategy, personally. Smarter ball would be letting the Democrats make their own beds and having them lie in them in 2014 and 2016, and then just repealing the damn thing in 2017.

 Seaward wrote:
I thought the same about the, "Bush secretly organized 9/11" stuff that made up a significant minority of Democratic thought processes, much less the "Bush intentionally lied about Iraq!" stuff. It seems throwing anything you can think of, no matter how patently insane, and seeing if it'll gain traction is part and parcel with being the party not in power now.

There are always crazies in the parties (the stuff you mention above isn't even close to the craziest stuff I've heard from left wingers). The difference is that a lot of the those crazies in the fringes of the Republican party all of a sudden aren't on the fringes any more - they're elected representatives and they're staffers.

I don't necessarily agree. If all you've got to threaten with is a shutdown, then there's no getting around that's all you've got to threaten with. I think the Republicans would answer that Obamacare itself is terrible governance, and between letting it get permanently installed and shutting the government down for a couple days, letting it get permanently installed is the greater evil.

You should always try and win when you play chess, but if you're screwed then you move on to the next game. You don't throw the board in the air and insist on throwing the board in the air in every game unless the other guy lets you win this one.

Because people should understand the context in which the current battle is played. It's important to try and win in chess, but the playing is more important than the win. And in politics, well it's a healthcare reform at the end of the day, you don't threaten to hit the debt ceiling and tank the economy because of it. Because you play that game long enough, and sooner or later one of those other mercenary guys will shoot Ed Harris...

I think it's a dumb strategy, personally. Smarter ball would be letting the Democrats make their own beds and having them lie in them in 2014 and 2016, and then just repealing the damn thing in 2017.

I think it's quite telling that Republicans are absolutely not letting that happen.

 Seaward wrote:

I think it's a dumb strategy, personally. Smarter ball would be letting the Democrats make their own beds and having them lie in them in 2014 and 2016, and then just repealing the damn thing in 2017.

Unfortunately there are too many assumptions involved in such a strategy, especially given that a House Republican who is not vehemently in favor of repealing Obamacare is not likely to be reelected.

The desperation of the individual Republican Congressmen currently engaged in this little game of chicken is reflective of the desperation expressed by the relevant voters in their respective districts, and the larger group of people that are sympathetic to the GOP. Of course, this is basically the bed* that the Republican Party and its associates have foolishly made for their representatives over the last 4 years, so my inclination is to be dismissive.





*Because much of the hysteria regarding Obamacare was manufactured. It is not good legislation, but it won't usher in a Communist state either.

 dogma wrote:
Unfortunately there are too many assumptions involved in such a strategy, especially given that a House Republican who is not vehemently in favor of repealing Obamacare is not likely to be reelected.

That is absolutely the flaw of any long game strategy with the American public, yeah. It's unfortunate.

Well. So far the only thing I find useful from the government this morning. While its not republican nor democrat. POTUS or VPOTUS cannot lay claim to it. Is my P38 can opener.

Somehow despite the shutdown I am still alive. I have reserves of coffee if only the power and water can manage to stay on.

Seriously?! Dang Frazz you a Texan. All you need to make coffee is a pot, water, and a fire to make coffee. You depending on the grid is funny

Texans can make coffee without coffee?

The wonders of American know-how and True Grit.

 Jihadin wrote:
Seriously?! Dang Frazz you a Texan. All you need to make coffee is a pot, water, and a fire to make coffee. You depending on the grid is funny

Well starting a fire in a high rise office building can be bad, FUN mind you, but bad...

Its ok, somehow the power stayed on. Somehow the water still worked. Coffee achieved.

If the coffee bean is not grounded that's when a Ziploc bag, sock, and 5lb ballpeen hammer using a big rock as an anvil comes into play. Only on deployments and extreme emergency here in the States

Mental note to self. Frazz and Kilkrazy possible quick death incase the world takes a "flush" but then if its a double flush we all be dead.....

I'm late to the party, but whay am i not surprised that the first post about the Govrnment Shutdown on Dakka was a blatantly partisan attack by the right wingers here?

Talk about trying to get out in front of the narrative!

Edit: Posted a day before the shut down went into effect even. Impressive!

 Jihadin wrote:
If the coffee bean is not grounded that's when a Ziploc bag, sock, and 5lb ballpeen hammer using a big rock as an anvil comes into play. Only on deployments and extreme emergency here in the States

Mental note to self. Frazz and Kilkrazy possible quick death incase the world takes a "flush" but then if its a double flush we all be dead.....

Oh have faith, I even have an old can of chickory coffee. it can be used for coffee or rocket fuel!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
They (the Democrats) pushed for a more comprehensive healthcare system in the 90s. Hillary Clinton was in charge.

TBH every major political party in Europe is more leftwing than the Democrats.

And every major economy in Europe besides Germany has been through how many recessions in the last 5 years?

It is great how Obama can modify the ACA however he wants but as soon the Republicans want to change something he goes all 'IT IS THE LAW OF THE LAND! '

 BaronIveagh wrote:
Under my Iron Rule of the Steel City, Steelers games will continue uninterrupted if I have to put a tank on every street corner. Wasteland mutants and refugees from south of the Mason-Dixon need not enter.

While I'm glad you're keeping West Virginians out of the north, why would you not just end the Steelers season and declare them World Champs considering they're more likely to continue their spiral down to Browns level of crappy football.

 Alfndrate wrote:

While I'm glad you're keeping West Virginians out of the north, why would you not just end the Steelers season and declare them World Champs considering they're more likely to continue their spiral down to Browns level of crappy football.

Because under my rule, playing poorly will result in having to swim across all three rivers and spend a week working in a soup kitchen to feed the proletariat masses. Loosing games will have successively worse punishments.

On the up side, home games will have free admission.

 sebster wrote:
Michael Bay's highly insightful political allegory The Rock is actually all about the threat to hit the debt ceiling (also Michael Bay is a time traveller). You have a sympathetic cause (well sympathetic to Michael Bay, he's a bit right wing as well), but Ed Harris, who represents Boehner, attempts to achieve his aim through bad means - taking some people hostage and hoping the other side will cave. When the bluff is called, Harris backs down but his bad policy has handed power to people who really are crazy enough to go through with it, and it's only because Sean Connery can beat up elite soldiers despite being about 70 years old that tragedy is averted. Obama, despite being much younger than Connery and therefore much more likely to win a fistfight, is nowhere near as cool as Connery and this won't be solved by throwing Eric Cantor off the top of Alcatraz.

I'm not sure if Nicholas Cage is Biden or Reid...

8:30 in the morning, and I've already read the best thing I'm going to read all day.

 d-usa wrote:

They just work for free until the people that deposit money are back at work once the shutdown ends.

Actually the majority of the Fed workforce will be furloughed, as unless you are military, it is generally illegal to work without pay (and even then, apparently our contracts say we can work up to 6 months with no pay, and it is not considered a breach of contract)

 whembly wrote:
Let's get technical here...

The GOP House PASSED several CR... what branch/party is NOT agreeing to terms again?

And it is part of the House's job to pass legislation up the chain that they know has a chance of going further.

Writing "the Senate smells like poop" on a napkin, sending it up, and acting indignant when the senate sends them back a drawn middle finger on the other side doesn't make it the Senate's fault.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Not really. Its just a case of the Rs saying "which thing do you want more?"

Its perfectly valid, especially after the Dems refusal to compromise on Obamacare itself.

If by "refused to compromise" you mean "asked the GOP for assistance, based much of it on previous/proposed/existing Republican legislation, and were told to get bent when Obama reached across the aisle", then yes, that would be fairly accurate.

 d-usa wrote:
Didn't we used to have this conversation in 2008-2012 except it was about the Democrats. When the Republicans were the united group and the Democrats couldn't pass anything even when they controlled both chambers and the White House because the factions were hurting each other?

To be fair, the Democratic party had the supermajority for, like, a month and a half. Between Franken being delayed and Kennedy passing away, it wasn't for long. Not to mention a couple of Blue Dogs who made it vastly less stable than the precision with which the GOP was marching to at the time.

 Seaward wrote:
That's one (incorrect) way of looking at it. Another is that it was a desperate attempt to appear bipartisan, because they lacked the balls to push for what they actually wanted and get saddled with the blame if it turned out not to be paradise.

Despite what the Tea Party may have led people to believe, part of governance is being realistic. Single Payer wasn't going to happen, so instead they set their sights on something realistic. And they got it. Trying to paint that as some sort of shortcoming is pretty remarkable.

 sebster wrote:
There are ways and means to pursue policy objectives. Threatening shut down and hitting the debt ceiling to get the other side to cave is terrible governance.

Michael Bay's highly insightful political allegory The Rock is actually all about the threat to hit the debt ceiling (also Michael Bay is a time traveller). You have a sympathetic cause (well sympathetic to Michael Bay, he's a bit right wing as well), but Ed Harris, who represents Boehner, attempts to achieve his aim through bad means - taking some people hostage and hoping the other side will cave. When the bluff is called, Harris backs down but his bad policy has handed power to people who really are crazy enough to go through with it, and it's only because Sean Connery can beat up elite soldiers despite being about 70 years old that tragedy is averted. Obama, despite being much younger than Connery and therefore much more likely to win a fistfight, is nowhere near as cool as Connery and this won't be solved by throwing Eric Cantor off the top of Alcatraz.

I'm not sure if Nicholas Cage is Biden or Reid...

The Rock is one of my favourite movies, and this... this is a work of art.

If you don't mind I'll be sharing it with some folks elsewhere whom ought to appreciate it.

And now I'm caught up on this thread. It's... sure been a read.

 Forar wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Let's get technical here...

The GOP House PASSED several CR... what branch/party is NOT agreeing to terms again?

And it is part of the House's job to pass legislation up the chain that they know has a chance of going further.

Writing "the Senate smells like poop" on a napkin, sending it up, and acting indignant when the senate sends them back a drawn middle finger on the other side doesn't make it the Senate's fault.

Ah... so, you'd be in favor of the House just rubber stamping then. Because, the Democrat Senate won't fething listen to their house counter part. Let's not place all the blame on Republican's feet here, eh? BOTH chambers are fething ridiculous.

I asked this in a different thread:
What was so bad about that last CR the House passed?

1) Individual Mandate delayed for one year... exactly the same as what Obama did for Big Business.
2) Forced the Congress Critters and appointed officials into the SAME exchange with the same subsidies calculus as normal citizen (the Vitter Amendment).
3) Finally, fully fund the rest of government w/o the usual Republican cry to reduce spending.

What was so bad and ridiculous about this?

 Grey Templar wrote:
Not really. Its just a case of the Rs saying "which thing do you want more?"

Its perfectly valid, especially after the Dems refusal to compromise on Obamacare itself.

If by "refused to compromise" you mean "asked the GOP for assistance, based much of it on previous/proposed/existing Republican legislation, and were told to get bent when Obama reached across the aisle", then yes, that would be fairly accurate.

Hogwash.

Reid and Pelosi fething CUT THE REPUBLICAN OUT of drafting the bill! Just google fu Bob Woodward's take on the whole ordeal.

The ACA is nothing like what the Republicans in the 80's/90's "theory hammered" in reforming healthcare. And truth be told, it wasn't the Congress critters themselve thinking this up... this was a THINK TANK's plan.

 d-usa wrote:
Didn't we used to have this conversation in 2008-2012 except it was about the Democrats. When the Republicans were the united group and the Democrats couldn't pass anything even when they controlled both chambers and the White House because the factions were hurting each other?

To be fair, the Democratic party had the supermajority for, like, a month and a half. Between Franken being delayed and Kennedy passing away, it wasn't for long. Not to mention a couple of Blue Dogs who made it vastly less stable than the precision with which the GOP was marching to at the time.

Nah... they could've passed many, MANY more things on their wish list. They fethed up and took their time (Reid even admitted to that).

 Seaward wrote:
That's one (incorrect) way of looking at it. Another is that it was a desperate attempt to appear bipartisan, because they lacked the balls to push for what they actually wanted and get saddled with the blame if it turned out not to be paradise.

Despite what the Tea Party may have led people to believe, part of governance is being realistic. Single Payer wasn't going to happen, so instead they set their sights on something realistic. And they got it. Trying to paint that as some sort of shortcoming is pretty remarkable.