A case

Mar. 15th, 2010 05:27 pm
napoleonofnerds: (Default)
[personal profile] napoleonofnerds
Given that Moody's has threatened the sovereign bond rating of the United States and that popular opinion does not support the bill or Congress, does adopting health care reform by means of a budget reconciliation represent an act of tyranny on the part of the government of the United States?

Date: 2010-03-16 05:16 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hussla.livejournal.com
Not tyranny, and it's not illegal.

It's just a really fucking horrible, stupid thing to do. Which is nothing new for congress.

Also, most investors who give a damn gave up on giving any credence to Moody's ratings about a year ago.

Date: 2010-03-16 01:41 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] napoleonofnerds.livejournal.com
I think you can make an argument for tyranny, which is why it's a debate case, rather than a claim.

What do I know?

Date: 2010-03-16 05:31 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kerridwyn.livejournal.com
According to your source, popular opinion does not conclude a high enough majority to deny the just-not-as-statistically-popular opinion of health care. All the poll results seem pretty evenly split.

Date: 2010-03-17 12:04 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] napoleonofnerds.livejournal.com
I tend to think that for something as major as this, if you can't get at least 55% of people on board, you should probably do something else to distract everyone from your failing administration.

Date: 2010-03-17 10:57 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kerridwyn.livejournal.com
It's a failing administration?

Date: 2010-03-17 06:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] napoleonofnerds.livejournal.com
I tend to think so.

July 2010

11 121314151617

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 19th, 2017 05:00 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios