The "Spending" aspect of the bill is irrelevant. You used the "It's law" defense, and my point was to show you that this would not be the first time a law has been repealed.
I was calling question as to you parentage. You seem like a hick. The implication was that your are consanguineous; like from W.Va. I guess I have my answer.
Born in MO raised in TN living outside of Atlanta. Why the word games? You made a statement I asked a question then you went bat shit crazy. What is justified to eliminate a "bad"/harmful law?
Again, show me any spending bill (resulting in law) that has been repealed. And the slavery thing is so out of context that it's laughable. How many writers of the Const. were slave owners?
Spending bill? Me: "So was slavery at one time. What was justified in ending that?" Slavery was law of the land as is Obamacare now.
I didn't mention spending before you did. I jumped into the conversation because you blamed the GOP for the shutdown, solely. I merely pointed out that the tactics on both sides - with neither willing to negotiate at all - is what is responsible for the shut down. You then included, in your defense, that Obamacare was "law", as if that is some excuse for it not to be included in the Democrat's negotiation strategy. So I pointed out that there have been many "laws" that have been repealed. We can argue why the GOP is using this law as a sticking point, but the real issue is that neither party wants to sit down to talk about it. Until it does, we are here. I'll end with a reiteration that you can certainly go after the GOP because it is responsible for tactics that have lead to a shutdown. But if you don't lay equal blame on the Democrats for the same, exact behavior, then all you are doing is showing your personal feelings on the ACA slant your political views on this issue. That would make you the same as probably 90% of the population, then.
Show me a "spending" bill that was shoved through like this one was. The fact that "spending bills" are normally defunded instead of repealed is probably why it isn't easy to find one that was repealed. But whenever a program has had it's funding cut in the history of the US (and there are probably TONS of them), it is effectively repealed. http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=278890 The above link is to refresh your memory on how this was "passed".
I am referring to this comment, "Or perhaps you are ok with funding a CR indefinitely, with never a cost cutting exercise to slow the speeding train?" No I am not ok with a perpetual CR. I heard on NPR that more CRs were signed under GOP than Dems. The means don't justify the end.