"Those who keep talking as if there are two sides to this, when there are not, are as much a part of the vandalism as Ted Cruz. Obama has played punctiliously by the constitutional rules – two elections, one court case – while the GOP has decided that the rules are for dummies and suckers, and throws over the board game as soon as it looks as if it is going to lose by the rules as they have always applied." - Andrew Sullivan
I wish I had better thoughts about the GOP than Sullivan's, but I don't. What can you say about the House Republicans who have committed to shutting down the whole game because they don't approve of a new rule? It's embarrassing for them and the shutdown as a whole is embarrassing for the entire US government.
Like every law, the ACA can be debated, tweaked, assessed, and changed as truths come to light during the rollout and impact of the law. So why doesn't the Republican party make this their focus? Instead they claim democrats are not willing to negotiate on the issue. But this assumes negotiation should take place on this issue at this point in time. On his show last night, Jon Stewart rightly pointed out that the debate over this was already held. There is no gap to bridge. Stewart further mocked the ridiculous talking point on the right that Obama should be as flexible with the opposition party as he is with the Russians and Iranians. If Obama can make a deal with the Russians and be heading toward something/anything resembling a peaceful resolution/way forward with Iran, but can't seem to move forward with House Republicans, then it does not reflect poorly on him, but on the GOP.
I would love for the GOP to develop some sort of constructive criticism of the ACA, which they find so abhorrent, but that criticism does not exist. There is only vague reference to a law and how it spells doom for the economy, the US government, and the American way of life, but without providing any proof of the latter even happening or the two being connected.
No comments:
Post a Comment