Unable to Accept Defeat, Republicans Blame Media for Surrender on Shutdown Deal

labradorBefore the government was shut down due to right-wing antics in Congress, anyone with half a brain knew they stood absolutely no chance at accomplishing their goal of defunding, defeating or repealing “Obamacare.”

This wasn’t some partisan opinion based on left-wing talking points, it was just basic facts conjured from easy to understand reality.

So as news has broken that the Senate has agreed upon a deal which should pass the House, thus reopening our government and raising the debt ceiling, you just had to know Republicans weren’t going to accept the blame from the majority of the American people for the shutdown.

Oh no.  It wasn’t their false rhetoric that this shutdown would end up with the defeat of “Obamacare,” or the fact that Boehner refused to let the House vote on the Senate’s clean resolution that would have passed the House and kept the government open.  Nope, those aren’t the reasons why they lost and have come out of this whole ordeal looking like a bunch of fools.

It’s the media’s fault.  The media is to blame for why the majority of the American people put the blame on the Republican party for this shutdown.

A group of House Republicans was quick to blame the media for what they called “false reporting” of their primary goal during this shutdown.

Representative Raul Labrador (R-ID) let his frustrations be known to reporters:

“You guys in the media continued reporting that what the conservatives were asking for was the full repeal of Obamacare. That’s absolutely false.  We never asked for a full repeal of Obamacare because we can’t get that.  We have voted on a full repeal of Obamacare that the Senate has rejected every single time. But what we were asking for, our position from the beginning, was exchanging a one-year continuing resolution for a one-year delay of Obamacare. That was something we thought both sides were giving on something.”

Yeah, he actually said that.

Here’s a fun fact: Republicans stood zero chance at getting a one-year delay of “Obamacare.”  Something President Obama and Democrats had made clear to them months before this shutdown began.  Yet that didn’t deter these conservative clowns from shutting down the government to accomplish something that stood as much chance at happening as repealing the law in its entirety.

And who exactly was reporting that Republicans wanted the law repealed in exchange for the one-year continuing resolution?  It’s been made pretty clear by pretty much every media source I’ve seen that Republicans were seeking to defund the law, or delay it for a year.  And let’s be honest, had they delayed it for another year, next year it would have just been something else from these people.

This isn’t a new law.  It was passed over 3 1/2 years ago.  So to think that they just wanted a one-year delay is foolish.  This push for a delay was just an attempt to buy them more time to find the next ridiculous request they would have made to try to keep “Obamacare” from being fully implemented.

Besides, they didn’t just want to delay the law.  Many Republicans were doing everything they could to simply not fund the law.  All of these measures were just last-ditch efforts to do whatever they could to try to buy time, hoping Republicans can take back Congress and try to repeal the law.

So this blame game Republicans are trying to pin on the media is simply pathetic.

Every time the media reports exactly what Republicans are doing it’s somehow “the mainstream media out to get them.”  It’s like when they’re asked questions they don’t know how to answer, suddenly it’s the media using “got’cha questions” to try to “trap them.”

They’re the only party that I’ve ever heard of where reporting exactly what they’re saying is somehow “liberally biased.”

Funny how facts, reality and the truth often seems to be bias toward liberals.

But at the end of the day, the reason why the majority of Americans blame Republicans for this government shutdown is simple.

It was their fault.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • Martin

    Vote them out now or we see the same thing again in February …

    • Steve Clark

      Unfortunately there’s no election between now and February – but hold that thought until 2014.

      • outrage mom

        there is an election nov 4th this year and one nov next year

      • jdubhub68

        While that may be true, the election for the House doesn’t happen until 2014 since they were elected in 2012 and serve for two-year terms and the Senate serves six-year terms.

  • Pat

    I wish they would all go away for a long, long while, like to a deserted island. I am so sick of their BS, and their constant whining. Cry me a river, you arrogant Republican jerks. I wish this loss would make all of you better men, but I highly doubt it.

  • Hypnotic Element

    They were under enormous pressure from the Insurance Company lobby and they lost it! I love it!

  • Nicholas A Kocal

    Don’t forget, republicans can only get elected because the idiot followers only listen to what the republican candidate says and never actually look at what they did.

  • jchastn

    There were so many Americans permanently damaged by this closure, and our Credit rating is going down. How can people still support these political terrorists? In the name of conservatism and GOD and COUNTRY and all that? How can anyone support these a–wipes? Ted Cruz is not even from the United States! He’s a Cuban/Canadian and he thinks that he knows whats best for this nation, and he’s an immigrant! He needs to shut up and hold on tight to that green card. He might get deported after we try him for sedition.

    • spewking

      I’m not a Ted Cruz fan but in all fairness, he is an American citizen because his mother is an American citizen. The fact that he was born in Canada doesn’t come into play. He can get dual citizenship since being born in Canada allows him to have Canadian citizenship also. But that would definitely screw his Presidential plans because I don’t think there has ever been a President with dual citizenship. Conflict of interests and all that. So he’ll stay an American citizen.

      • Alex Peterson

        No he isn’t. You have to be born on american soil to be an american citizen. his parents may petition for him to become a naturalized citizen, but he cannot run for President unless born in this country – which he wasn’t.

      • spewking

        Alex Peterson, the constitution does not specify that a person needs to be born on US soil. It says that person needs to be a citizen, either natural born or passed down through the parent(s) which happens once a person is born, no matter where they were born.

      • Alex Peterson

        Wrong – here is the actual quote from your actual Constitution.Qualifications for the Office of President
        Age and Citizenship requirements – US Constitution, Article II, Section 1 – “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States”. Crazy Cruz, who hears the voice of God in his head, is ineligible unless there is a constitutional amendment OR The Supreme Court changes the definition of “natural born citizen” that they used to determine President Obama’s qualifications – those against Obama where trying to get him disqualified based on his father being born in Kenya. The Supreme Court ruled that the parental birth country was not a factor.

      • spewking

        Alex Peterson, thx for proving my point. No where in the quote you printed says that someone has to be born in the US in order to be POTUS. The Constitution does NOT define what a “natural Born” citizen is. There is NO case law (re: SCOTUS decisions) that that supports your position. In the case Minor v. Happersett (1875), the Court ruled, “The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that”. Now though the Constitution is vague in what constitutes a natural born
        citizen, Congess has stepped in to attempt to fill in the gap. Under Title 8 of the US Code, Section 1401 defines the following “Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as
        long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S.for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)”. Also Currently, citizenship in the US is governed by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. The most recent changes to statutory law was done by Congress in 2001. The rules at the time of Cruz’s birth which are the rules that were in effect from December 24, 1952 – November 14, 1986. A person born abroad between those dates is a US
        citizen upon birth if all of the following are true:
        The person’s parents were married at the time of birth
        One of the person’s parents was a U.S. citizen when the person was born
        The citizen parent lived at least ten years in the United States before the child’s birth;
        A minimum of 5 of these 10 years in the United States were after the citizen parent’s 14th birthday.
        By these very definitions of the law, it would appear that Sen. Cruz is a natural born citizen and thus meets the qualifications to run for President if he decided to do so. This also does one more thing, as
        well. In regards to President Obama, if the “birther” theory had been proven correct (and I’m not saying that it is) in that he had been born in Kenya (instead of Hawaii) to his US mother and his Kenyan father, he would still qualify as a natural born citizen.

        Please supply the case law that you base you position on.

      • Alex Peterson

        I don’t know that I proved your point. Article II, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President….” This has traditionally been interpreted to mean that only citizens who were born on U.S. soil should be eligible to become president. The Constitution plainly says “natural born citizen” and I stated, that term could be up for redefinition. In all the lawsuits against President Obama the birth place of his parent was deemed not applicable, though the lawsuits were trying to make him a Kenyan as his father was born in Kenya, not an American because one of his parents was American.

        I am not quite sure what you wanted me to prove, There are a lot of different court rulings regarding President Obama and his brith parent not making any difference to his qualification – but here are two. Indiana Court of Appeals stated: “Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are ‘natural born Citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.” Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana
        (Ind.App., Nov 12, 2009) 916 N.E.2d 678 at 688[54]
        Administrative Law Judge Michael Malihi in Georgia decided a group of eligibility challenge cases saying “The Indiana Court rejected the argument that Mr.
        Obama was ineligible, stating that the children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.

        Now there have been more than two dozen
        proposed constitutional amendments introduced in Congress to relax the restriction on the Presidential requirement of “natural born citizen” The Bingham amendment of 1974 (for Henry Kissinger) would have also made clear the eligibility of those
        born abroad to U.S. parents, while the Hatch one would have allowed those who have been naturalized citizens for twenty years to be eligible(for
        Schwartzeneger – 2003)
        All proposals to relax the restriction to date have failed.
        Immigration Law and the Constitution are at odds. A Constitutional amendment to define natural born citizen in regards to President requirements will need to be made to allow Cruz to be President. It will be an interesting legal fight, though I doubt the looney will get so far as to be the Presidential nominee for the Republican Party.

      • Alex Peterson

        This is from Facebook – says it all.
        Conservative Logic 101 – President Obama – born in the US to a citizen mother and a foreign father, therefore not a citizen and ineligible for President.

        Cruz, born in Canada to a citizen mother and a foreign father, therefore a US citizen and eligible to become President.

  • Dave

    I totally understand the Congressman’s point. The left-wing, socialist media elites of Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Glenn Beck, Matt Drudge, Sean Hannity, Fox News, The Washington Times, The New York Post and the entire News Corporation have conspired to paint Republicans in a bad light. By talking.
    It’s also the lamestream media that’s to blame for the Red Sox losing last night. I mean, clearly they got to Jake Peavy. Why else would an All-Star caliber pitcher give up seven runs in a playoff game? Wake up America!

    • gemma liar

      please don’t 4get MY favorite,,,,, michelle ” no tits and HATING life because of that ” malkin

  • Alan Jones

    It has been the blame and switch the subject game ever since the tea party came about! In my 41 years voting I have never seen anything like the bozo’s. If I don’t get my way it is blame the other party or blame the liberal media. Hey Guys the media is mostly owned by 6 people who just happen to support you right wing nuts! So keep blaming the media right out of office in 2014!

  • jdubhub68

    What happened to Republicans being the Party of Personal Responsibility?

    • gemma liar

      they are personally responsible for ”tefloning” the blame elsewhere

  • gemma liar

    am I alonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnne in enjoying tremendously the atrophying of the new john birch society???

  • Mike Morrissey

    That’s like blaming Obama for this country’s racism. Racism existed before he was elected. The election just exposed that fact.
    The county’s divisiveness was caused by the shutdown. Actually, America was divided before the shutdown. But I digress. The shutdown was caused by a faction of Congress, not the media. The media (How was their reporting “false”?) only exposed who America blamed.

  • Vintage Rock

    The fact of the matter is that without Republicans there’d be no Democrats and vice versa. As soon as we get rid of both parties, real change and progress will come…

    • Pipercat

      Then the “new” parties will come into being with new names and similar agendas. The difference between the two dominant ideologies of this nation are split between concepts of wealth and time. One tends to value wealth; while the other values time. Hence, “meet the new boss; same as the old boss”…

      • Vintage Rock

        Who said anything about “new” parties? I’m for no parties. Vote on individuals and ideas, not parties and platforms.

      • Pipercat

        … a party by any other name is?

      • Vintage Rock

        No party. Perhaps the concept of “no parties” is too progressive for this page…

      • Scaramongus

        but who would you lobby?

      • Vintage Rock

        Abolish the lobbyists. They’re part of the problem because they’re the ones who buy and sell the Republicans and Democrats.

      • Pipercat

        .. or maybe too idealistic?

      • Vintage Rock

        Every action starts with an idea…

      • Pipercat

        Ideas are great, but human nature will always prevail. Call them parties, groups, posse or even a coffee clutch, the end result will always be a group of like minded people. Formally or informally, a groups will form then, all that idealism is wasted on a dream.

      • Vintage Rock

        I suppose, but it has to start somewhere. If everyone believes the current situation can not be changed, then it won’t change.

      • Pipercat

        Oh no, I do believe the current situation must be changed. Problem is, how? The ideas on lobbying are more to the point. Fucking lobbyists have more access to our representatives than we do. Problem with that, is the minute a law is passed to end lobbying, the courts get involved and bingo, violation of the First Amendment. Somehow we ,the electorate, must find a way to hold our representatives accountable and remind them how disposable they are. Gonna take some doing, there is no doubt about that.

  • Vintage Rock

    To paraphrase a well-worn saying, insanity is to keep voting for Democrats and Republicans, and expecting different results.