The Tea Party is back in business! (1 Viewer)

[TobiasFunke]

I'm not here to play journalist. I wouldn't sink to their level.

No, you're just here to post misleading garbage

Really? Please educate us and provide a detailed reutation of each of the 14 points mentioned in the link I posted.

The points are factual. The context is misleading. The intro says:

With the mainstream media continually warning of the apocalyptic consequences of a government shutdown that is unlikely to happen, the Institute for Policy Innovation compiled some “fun facts” about past shutdowns

Setting aside the incredibly stupid straw man argument (I haven't heard a single mainstream media member warn of "apocalyptic consequences"), it also suggests that past shutdowns are the same as this potential shutdown. But they're nothing alike. None of the negative consequences of a current shutdown took place during the pre-1981 Carter-era shutdowns. I don't know whether they're being purposefully misleading or just ignorantly misleading, but I know they're being misleading.

 

[The Commish]

Who said there's anything I need to defend? I think a shutdown would be a great thing. It would show people that the world carries on without Uncle Sugar holding their hand all the time. Maybe some would acutally reconsider the depth of their dependency.

What exactly was your point in posting the link?

Simply to show that it's happened before and will happen again. Despite the handwringing and howls of impending apocalypse from the left the world did not end. There was also no Tea Party around to act as a convenient foil for the media.

Was anyone here challenging that it's never happened before?

Some would have you believe that somehow this time it's different and there's plenty of the "woe-is-meing" going on.

So....no? This doesn't really answer my question. Is your position that the government shut down will be "no big deal"?

 

[TPW]

even that pales in comparison to default due to failure to raise the debt limit, which is the far greater concern.

Which is why the Republican leadership wants to kick the can down the road to the debt default deadline. A debt default would be so severe (or at least so risky) that they know they'll never do it -- so they'll have a lot more leverage to find a way out.

Yup, that's exactly right. They know they're in a losing position now, but they take the heat off themselves if they push the debate to one with far greater stakes, so that when they cave on that they are in a better position to defend themselves as having acted in the best interests of the country, etc.

The nutjobs saw right through that; that's why they continue to push confrontation on the CR (even though many/most of Obamacare would remain in place even if the federal government shuts down).

Actually, you're exactly right. As I said yesterday in another thread, the insitutional Republican party will happily fold when thrown an adequate bone by the Democrats.

The "nutjobs" though are the people such as yourself who can't see that a financial crisis is coming whether you like it or not but continue to perpetuate the present socio-economic model out of greed, fear, or some blind hope that somehow things will get better if only we try harder. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. A shutdown might help to rouse some people out of their slumber.

 

[TPW]

Who said there's anything I need to defend? I think a shutdown would be a great thing. It would show people that the world carries on without Uncle Sugar holding their hand all the time. Maybe some would acutally reconsider the depth of their dependency.

What exactly was your point in posting the link?

Simply to show that it's happened before and will happen again. Despite the handwringing and howls of impending apocalypse from the left the world did not end. There was also no Tea Party around to act as a convenient foil for the media.

Was anyone here challenging that it's never happened before?

Some would have you believe that somehow this time it's different and there's plenty of the "woe-is-meing" going on.

So....no? This doesn't really answer my question. Is your position that the government shut down will be "no big deal"?

Yes!

 

[The Commish]

even that pales in comparison to default due to failure to raise the debt limit, which is the far greater concern.

Which is why the Republican leadership wants to kick the can down the road to the debt default deadline. A debt default would be so severe (or at least so risky) that they know they'll never do it -- so they'll have a lot more leverage to find a way out.

Yup, that's exactly right. They know they're in a losing position now, but they take the heat off themselves if they push the debate to one with far greater stakes, so that when they cave on that they are in a better position to defend themselves as having acted in the best interests of the country, etc.

The nutjobs saw right through that; that's why they continue to push confrontation on the CR (even though many/most of Obamacare would remain in place even if the federal government shuts down).

Actually, you're exactly right. As I said yesterday in another thread, the insitutional Republican party will happily fold when thrown an adequate bone by the Democrats.

The "nutjobs" though are the people such as yourself who can't see that a financial crisis is coming whether you like it or not but continue to perpetuate the present socio-economic model out of greed, fear, or some blind hope that somehow things will get better if only we try harder. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. A shutdown might help to rouse some people out of their slumber.

Shutdowns have happened in the past....seems like it fits your definition of insanity (you know...the doing the same thing over and over again)

 

[The Commish]

Who said there's anything I need to defend? I think a shutdown would be a great thing. It would show people that the world carries on without Uncle Sugar holding their hand all the time. Maybe some would acutally reconsider the depth of their dependency.

What exactly was your point in posting the link?

Simply to show that it's happened before and will happen again. Despite the handwringing and howls of impending apocalypse from the left the world did not end. There was also no Tea Party around to act as a convenient foil for the media.

Was anyone here challenging that it's never happened before?

Some would have you believe that somehow this time it's different and there's plenty of the "woe-is-meing" going on.

So....no? This doesn't really answer my question. Is your position that the government shut down will be "no big deal"?

Yes!

Was our credit rating reduction "no big deal"? Just trying to get a gauge of where you're at in all this...you're all over the place (or so it seems). It appears that you believe the stakes are the same as all the previous incidents. Is that correct?

 

[3C's]

Please stop

You need an alias, perhaps, Elizabeth Taylor would be suitable

You have reached Terminal Lameness

Number one news story in Washington, but I should shut up about it? Stay out of the ####### thread if it bothers you that much.

 

[TPW]

even that pales in comparison to default due to failure to raise the debt limit, which is the far greater concern.

Which is why the Republican leadership wants to kick the can down the road to the debt default deadline. A debt default would be so severe (or at least so risky) that they know they'll never do it -- so they'll have a lot more leverage to find a way out.

Yup, that's exactly right. They know they're in a losing position now, but they take the heat off themselves if they push the debate to one with far greater stakes, so that when they cave on that they are in a better position to defend themselves as having acted in the best interests of the country, etc.

The nutjobs saw right through that; that's why they continue to push confrontation on the CR (even though many/most of Obamacare would remain in place even if the federal government shuts down).

Actually, you're exactly right. As I said yesterday in another thread, the insitutional Republican party will happily fold when thrown an adequate bone by the Democrats.

The "nutjobs" though are the people such as yourself who can't see that a financial crisis is coming whether you like it or not but continue to perpetuate the present socio-economic model out of greed, fear, or some blind hope that somehow things will get better if only we try harder. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. A shutdown might help to rouse some people out of their slumber.

Shutdowns have happened in the past....seems like it fits your definition of insanity (you know...the doing the same thing over and over again)

Let's try 3-4 months this time instead of just a few days and see what happens. As for the credit rating, we're already just a percentage point or two increase in interest rates away from having to service around 1 trillion dollars in immediate debt payments. The only thing preventing that is the fact that the Federal Reserve has held them artificially low through the direct purchase of trillons of dollars in securities.

We're literally just one shock away from the whole thing coming crashing down and most Americans are blissfully unaware of that. I think it's time they find out and if a shutdown is what it takes, so be it. Better now than a decade down the line when the situation is ten times worse.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Who said there's anything I need to defend? I think a shutdown would be a great thing. It would show people that the world carries on without Uncle Sugar holding their hand all the time. Maybe some would acutally reconsider the depth of their dependency.

What exactly was your point in posting the link?

Simply to show that it's happened before and will happen again. Despite the handwringing and howls of impending apocalypse from the left the world did not end. There was also no Tea Party around to act as a convenient foil for the media.

Was anyone here challenging that it's never happened before?

Some would have you believe that somehow this time it's different and there's plenty of the "woe-is-meing" going on.

So....no? This doesn't really answer my question. Is your position that the government shut down will be "no big deal"?

Yes!

Whether it's a big deal or not depends on how long it lasts. We can say in retrospect that most of the previous shutdowns were "no big deal" because they didn't last more than a couple days or because they happened before budget gaps shut down the federal government. The problem with a new shutdown, of course, is that there's no assurance that it will end quickly once it starts. It seems incredibly stupid and risky to me to just write off the impacts based on the assumption that it'll just end quickly when you have no reason to assume it will.

 

[timschochet]

Starting with TARP (which was even before the Tea Party existed) the playbook for conservative House Republicans for every economic crisis has been: we'll vote against it, but enough moderate Republicans and Democrats will vote for it to get it passed- then we can tell our constituents, "Hey we tried to stop it!" It was a cynical vote all the way, because prior to 2010 most of these conservatives knew that these bills had to be passed' they just didn't want to be the ones voting for them. Win win.

But the problem is that in 2010 all of these Tea Party true believer types got elected, and when they say they'll vote against, they mean it. Now the older conservative politicians are trapped. If they vote with the Tea Partiers this time around, they can cause a shutdown and they can prevent the debt ceiling from being raised; there aren't enough moderates and Dems left in the House to defeat them. But if they turn their backs on the Tea Party, the older conservatives will be primaried next year. They're desperately looking for a way out of this trap and there may not be one.

 

[timschochet]

even that pales in comparison to default due to failure to raise the debt limit, which is the far greater concern.

Which is why the Republican leadership wants to kick the can down the road to the debt default deadline. A debt default would be so severe (or at least so risky) that they know they'll never do it -- so they'll have a lot more leverage to find a way out.

Yup, that's exactly right. They know they're in a losing position now, but they take the heat off themselves if they push the debate to one with far greater stakes, so that when they cave on that they are in a better position to defend themselves as having acted in the best interests of the country, etc.

The nutjobs saw right through that; that's why they continue to push confrontation on the CR (even though many/most of Obamacare would remain in place even if the federal government shuts down).

Actually, you're exactly right. As I said yesterday in another thread, the insitutional Republican party will happily fold when thrown an adequate bone by the Democrats.

The "nutjobs" though are the people such as yourself who can't see that a financial crisis is coming whether you like it or not but continue to perpetuate the present socio-economic model out of greed, fear, or some blind hope that somehow things will get better if only we try harder. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. A shutdown might help to rouse some people out of their slumber.

Shutdowns have happened in the past....seems like it fits your definition of insanity (you know...the doing the same thing over and over again)

Let's try 3-4 months this time instead of just a few days and see what happens. As for the credit rating, we're already just a percentage point or two increase in interest rates away from having to service around 1 trillion dollars in immediate debt payments. The only thing preventing that is the fact that the Federal Reserve has held them artificially low through the direct purchase of trillons of dollars in securities.

We're literally just one shock away from the whole thing coming crashing down and most Americans are blissfully unaware of that. I think it's time they find out and if a shutdown is what it takes, so be it. Better now than a decade down the line when the situation is ten times worse.

Wow. I'm glad you wrote this; if I had attempted to do so, I would have been accused of caricature.

TPW represents, IMO, EXACTLY what the Tea Party wants to happen. No joke. These are scary people.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I see TPW is back, FBG median IQ just dropped 12 points.

 

[Dr. Gobbler]

Hello? Monkey brains? Yes, I'm talking to most of you. While you guys are in here arguing D's versus R's and all of your other sheep like thinking, the people in the know are making tons and tons of money off of this debt ceiling limit threat. Look at the Market!!! Do you know what to do when you have news that will tell you the stock market will be declining for a set period of time? Do you know what happens when that 'threat' magically is resolved and do you know which day it will be resolved on? Hello Rally! Smart people are winning on both ends!! Why is the gap between rich and poor widening? Because you guys are in here jerking each other off with nonsense when, if you had any sense, you would see the signs that the game is afoot. How many times do they have to do this before you catch on?

 

[TobiasFunke]

Hello? Monkey brains? Yes, I'm talking to most of you. While you guys are in here arguing D's versus R's and all of your other sheep like thinking, the people in the know are making tons and tons of money off of this debt ceiling limit threat. Look at the Market!!! Do you know what to do when you have news that will tell you the stock market will be declining for a set period of time? Do you know what happens when that 'threat' magically is resolved and do you know which day it will be resolved on? Hello Rally! Smart people are winning on both ends!! Why is the gap between rich and poor widening? Because you guys are in here jerking each other off with nonsense when, if you had any sense, you would see the signs that the game is afoot. How many times do they have to do this before you catch on?

You seem like an honest and savvy guy. Mind if I pick your brain?

I owe someone money, but it's someone I met on the internet rather than in person. I'm thinking of just not paying them, because what are they gonna do about it, right?

What do you think? Smart move?

 

[Dr. Gobbler]

Hello? Monkey brains? Yes, I'm talking to most of you. While you guys are in here arguing D's versus R's and all of your other sheep like thinking, the people in the know are making tons and tons of money off of this debt ceiling limit threat. Look at the Market!!! Do you know what to do when you have news that will tell you the stock market will be declining for a set period of time? Do you know what happens when that 'threat' magically is resolved and do you know which day it will be resolved on? Hello Rally! Smart people are winning on both ends!! Why is the gap between rich and poor widening? Because you guys are in here jerking each other off with nonsense when, if you had any sense, you would see the signs that the game is afoot. How many times do they have to do this before you catch on?

You seem like an honest and savvy guy. Mind if I pick your brain?

I owe someone money, but it's someone I met on the internet rather than in person. I'm thinking of just not paying them, because what are they gonna do about it, right?

What do you think? Smart move?

Depends, is this person a giant dooshnozzle with about 10 aliases that said giant dooshnozzle uses to support his arguments and ifights?

 

[The Commish]

even that pales in comparison to default due to failure to raise the debt limit, which is the far greater concern.

Which is why the Republican leadership wants to kick the can down the road to the debt default deadline. A debt default would be so severe (or at least so risky) that they know they'll never do it -- so they'll have a lot more leverage to find a way out.

Yup, that's exactly right. They know they're in a losing position now, but they take the heat off themselves if they push the debate to one with far greater stakes, so that when they cave on that they are in a better position to defend themselves as having acted in the best interests of the country, etc.

The nutjobs saw right through that; that's why they continue to push confrontation on the CR (even though many/most of Obamacare would remain in place even if the federal government shuts down).

Actually, you're exactly right. As I said yesterday in another thread, the insitutional Republican party will happily fold when thrown an adequate bone by the Democrats.

The "nutjobs" though are the people such as yourself who can't see that a financial crisis is coming whether you like it or not but continue to perpetuate the present socio-economic model out of greed, fear, or some blind hope that somehow things will get better if only we try harder. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. A shutdown might help to rouse some people out of their slumber.

Shutdowns have happened in the past....seems like it fits your definition of insanity (you know...the doing the same thing over and over again)

Let's try 3-4 months this time instead of just a few days and see what happens. As for the credit rating, we're already just a percentage point or two increase in interest rates away from having to service around 1 trillion dollars in immediate debt payments. The only thing preventing that is the fact that the Federal Reserve has held them artificially low through the direct purchase of trillons of dollars in securities.

We're literally just one shock away from the whole thing coming crashing down and most Americans are blissfully unaware of that. I think it's time they find out and if a shutdown is what it takes, so be it. Better now than a decade down the line when the situation is ten times worse.

I'm not sure which is worse....the group saying a shutdown would be an epic impact to anyone and everyone or the dooms dayers who think we are just a step away from a global economic melt down....all delusional if you ask me.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Hello? Monkey brains? Yes, I'm talking to most of you. While you guys are in here arguing D's versus R's and all of your other sheep like thinking, the people in the know are making tons and tons of money off of this debt ceiling limit threat. Look at the Market!!! Do you know what to do when you have news that will tell you the stock market will be declining for a set period of time? Do you know what happens when that 'threat' magically is resolved and do you know which day it will be resolved on? Hello Rally! Smart people are winning on both ends!! Why is the gap between rich and poor widening? Because you guys are in here jerking each other off with nonsense when, if you had any sense, you would see the signs that the game is afoot. How many times do they have to do this before you catch on?

You seem like an honest and savvy guy. Mind if I pick your brain?

I owe someone money, but it's someone I met on the internet rather than in person. I'm thinking of just not paying them, because what are they gonna do about it, right?

What do you think? Smart move?

 

[TobiasFunke]

even that pales in comparison to default due to failure to raise the debt limit, which is the far greater concern.

Which is why the Republican leadership wants to kick the can down the road to the debt default deadline. A debt default would be so severe (or at least so risky) that they know they'll never do it -- so they'll have a lot more leverage to find a way out.

Yup, that's exactly right. They know they're in a losing position now, but they take the heat off themselves if they push the debate to one with far greater stakes, so that when they cave on that they are in a better position to defend themselves as having acted in the best interests of the country, etc.

The nutjobs saw right through that; that's why they continue to push confrontation on the CR (even though many/most of Obamacare would remain in place even if the federal government shuts down).

Actually, you're exactly right. As I said yesterday in another thread, the insitutional Republican party will happily fold when thrown an adequate bone by the Democrats.

The "nutjobs" though are the people such as yourself who can't see that a financial crisis is coming whether you like it or not but continue to perpetuate the present socio-economic model out of greed, fear, or some blind hope that somehow things will get better if only we try harder. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. A shutdown might help to rouse some people out of their slumber.

Shutdowns have happened in the past....seems like it fits your definition of insanity (you know...the doing the same thing over and over again)

Let's try 3-4 months this time instead of just a few days and see what happens. As for the credit rating, we're already just a percentage point or two increase in interest rates away from having to service around 1 trillion dollars in immediate debt payments. The only thing preventing that is the fact that the Federal Reserve has held them artificially low through the direct purchase of trillons of dollars in securities.

We're literally just one shock away from the whole thing coming crashing down and most Americans are blissfully unaware of that. I think it's time they find out and if a shutdown is what it takes, so be it. Better now than a decade down the line when the situation is ten times worse.

I'm not sure which is worse....the group saying a shutdown would be an epic impact to anyone and everyone or the dooms dayers who think we are just a step away from a global economic melt down....all delusional if you ask me.

These people do not exist. Nobody thinks the impact of a shutdown would be "epic" on day 1. It's the risk of a prolonged shutdown that's the problem.

 

[jon_mx]

Starting with TARP (which was even before the Tea Party existed) the playbook for conservative House Republicans for every economic crisis has been: we'll vote against it, but enough moderate Republicans and Democrats will vote for it to get it passed- then we can tell our constituents, "Hey we tried to stop it!" It was a cynical vote all the way, because prior to 2010 most of these conservatives knew that these bills had to be passed' they just didn't want to be the ones voting for them. Win win.

But the problem is that in 2010 all of these Tea Party true believer types got elected, and when they say they'll vote against, they mean it. Now the older conservative politicians are trapped. If they vote with the Tea Partiers this time around, they can cause a shutdown and they can prevent the debt ceiling from being raised; there aren't enough moderates and Dems left in the House to defeat them. But if they turn their backs on the Tea Party, the older conservatives will be primaried next year. They're desperately looking for a way out of this trap and there may not be one.

Pretty much SOP for politics since the beginning of time.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

There will be no debt default. Obama could stand in front of Congress waving both middle fingers while screwing Boehner's girlfriend and screaming "I got yer negotiations right here, #####!" and Boehner would still cave and work with Dems to pass a bill in the end.

It's all a show.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I see TPW is back, FBG median IQ just dropped 12 points.

 

[humpback]

Please stop

You need an alias, perhaps, Elizabeth Taylor would be suitable

You have reached Terminal Lameness

Number one news story in Washington, but I should shut up about it? Stay out of the ####### thread if it bothers you that much.

It's fine to discuss it, but the constant "the sky is falling and it's all because of the TEA PARTY!!!@$!@#!" stuff does get old around the 10,000th time or so. Just sayin'.

 

[The Commish]

even that pales in comparison to default due to failure to raise the debt limit, which is the far greater concern.

Which is why the Republican leadership wants to kick the can down the road to the debt default deadline. A debt default would be so severe (or at least so risky) that they know they'll never do it -- so they'll have a lot more leverage to find a way out.

Yup, that's exactly right. They know they're in a losing position now, but they take the heat off themselves if they push the debate to one with far greater stakes, so that when they cave on that they are in a better position to defend themselves as having acted in the best interests of the country, etc.

The nutjobs saw right through that; that's why they continue to push confrontation on the CR (even though many/most of Obamacare would remain in place even if the federal government shuts down).

Actually, you're exactly right. As I said yesterday in another thread, the insitutional Republican party will happily fold when thrown an adequate bone by the Democrats.

The "nutjobs" though are the people such as yourself who can't see that a financial crisis is coming whether you like it or not but continue to perpetuate the present socio-economic model out of greed, fear, or some blind hope that somehow things will get better if only we try harder. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. A shutdown might help to rouse some people out of their slumber.

Shutdowns have happened in the past....seems like it fits your definition of insanity (you know...the doing the same thing over and over again)

Let's try 3-4 months this time instead of just a few days and see what happens. As for the credit rating, we're already just a percentage point or two increase in interest rates away from having to service around 1 trillion dollars in immediate debt payments. The only thing preventing that is the fact that the Federal Reserve has held them artificially low through the direct purchase of trillons of dollars in securities.

We're literally just one shock away from the whole thing coming crashing down and most Americans are blissfully unaware of that. I think it's time they find out and if a shutdown is what it takes, so be it. Better now than a decade down the line when the situation is ten times worse.

I'm not sure which is worse....the group saying a shutdown would be an epic impact to anyone and everyone or the dooms dayers who think we are just a step away from a global economic melt down....all delusional if you ask me.

These people do not exist. Nobody thinks the impact of a shutdown would be "epic" on day 1. It's the risk of a prolonged shutdown that's the problem.

Sorry....it's really hard for me to tell. It's gotten to the point where I can't tell hyperbole from actual beliefs.

 

[timschochet]

There will be no debt default. Obama could stand in front of Congress waving both middle fingers while screwing Boehner's girlfriend and screaming "I got yer negotiations right here, #####!" and Boehner would still cave and work with Dems to pass a bill in the end.

It's all a show.

Boehner is not in charge of these guys. He can't get enough of them to go along, unless some of the conservatives who have taken a hardline stance are willing to do a 180 and lose face before their constituents.

 

[timschochet]

Please stop

You need an alias, perhaps, Elizabeth Taylor would be suitable

You have reached Terminal Lameness

Number one news story in Washington, but I should shut up about it? Stay out of the ####### thread if it bothers you that much.

It's fine to discuss it, but the constant "the sky is falling and it's all because of the TEA PARTY!!!@$!@#!" stuff does get old around the 10,000th time or so. Just sayin'.

The last time the Tea Partiers even threatened not to raise the debt ceiling, the DOW plunged and our credit rating was lowered. This time around it is far more likely that they will actually go through with it, because their main demand (defunding Obamacare) is a political non-starter and they know it. So while I have NEVER written anything close to the sky is falling, the situation IS serious, and the Tea Party is to blame. Again. It's the truth, whether that gets old or not.

 

[B-Deep]

Hello? Monkey brains? Yes, I'm talking to most of you. While you guys are in here arguing D's versus R's and all of your other sheep like thinking, the people in the know are making tons and tons of money off of this debt ceiling limit threat. Look at the Market!!! Do you know what to do when you have news that will tell you the stock market will be declining for a set period of time? Do you know what happens when that 'threat' magically is resolved and do you know which day it will be resolved on? Hello Rally! Smart people are winning on both ends!! Why is the gap between rich and poor widening? Because you guys are in here jerking each other off with nonsense when, if you had any sense, you would see the signs that the game is afoot. How many times do they have to do this before you catch on?

You seem like an honest and savvy guy. Mind if I pick your brain?

I owe someone money, but it's someone I met on the internet rather than in person. I'm thinking of just not paying them, because what are they gonna do about it, right?

What do you think? Smart move?

Depends, is this person a giant dooshnozzle with about 10 aliases that said giant dooshnozzle uses to support his arguments and ifights?

why would you wager with someone like that?

you know what is worse than a giant dooshnozzle?

a welcher

 

[TobiasFunke]

Please stop

You need an alias, perhaps, Elizabeth Taylor would be suitable

You have reached Terminal Lameness

Number one news story in Washington, but I should shut up about it? Stay out of the ####### thread if it bothers you that much.

It's fine to discuss it, but the constant "the sky is falling and it's all because of the TEA PARTY!!!@$!@#!" stuff does get old around the 10,000th time or so. Just sayin'.

The last time the Tea Partiers even threatened not to raise the debt ceiling, the DOW plunged and our credit rating was lowered. This time around it is far more likely that they will actually go through with it, because their main demand (defunding Obamacare) is a political non-starter and they know it. So while I have NEVER written anything close to the sky is falling, the situation IS serious, and the Tea Party is to blame. Again. It's the truth, whether that gets old or not.

I don't buy this. I think the fact that we went through this last time educated the American people on how ridiculous it would be to not raise the debt ceiling, to the point that it's basically a non-starter now. That's why you saw Boehner try to push the Obamacare stuff back to the debt ceiling debate; he obviously knows defunding Obamacare is a losing proposition and the "loss" will play better if he is seen as having no choice. The Dems can give him a meaningless face-saving concession and that will be the end of it. And like i said, the nutjobs know this too, and that's why they're insisting that Obamacare defunding stay in the CR debate instead of being bumped to the debt limit.

I think we're at risk of a short shutdown so the nutjobs can claim they made their point, but there's absolutely no way we'll default. These people aren't anti-America radicals who want to take the country down, they're just idiots.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

There will be no debt default. Obama could stand in front of Congress waving both middle fingers while screwing Boehner's girlfriend and screaming "I got yer negotiations right here, #####!" and Boehner would still cave and work with Dems to pass a bill in the end.

It's all a show.

Boehner is not in charge of these guys. He can't get enough of them to go along, unless some of the conservatives who have taken a hardline stance are willing to do a 180 and lose face before their constituents.

Which is why he'll do a deal with Dems if he has to.

 

[B-Deep]

i assume all of this is more about 2016 than anything going on now, and it'll likley pass with a lot of bluster so that a few people in 2016 can say "I stood up to obamacare!"

 

[Rich Conway]

Please stop

You need an alias, perhaps, Elizabeth Taylor would be suitable

You have reached Terminal Lameness

Number one news story in Washington, but I should shut up about it? Stay out of the ####### thread if it bothers you that much.

It's fine to discuss it, but the constant "the sky is falling and it's all because of the TEA PARTY!!!@$!@#!" stuff does get old around the 10,000th time or so. Just sayin'.

The last time the Tea Partiers even threatened not to raise the debt ceiling, the DOW plunged and our credit rating was lowered. This time around it is far more likely that they will actually go through with it, because their main demand (defunding Obamacare) is a political non-starter and they know it. So while I have NEVER written anything close to the sky is falling, the situation IS serious, and the Tea Party is to blame. Again. It's the truth, whether that gets old or not.

You're about three posts away from Mr. Ham.

 

[timschochet]

Please stop

You need an alias, perhaps, Elizabeth Taylor would be suitable

You have reached Terminal Lameness

Number one news story in Washington, but I should shut up about it? Stay out of the ####### thread if it bothers you that much.

It's fine to discuss it, but the constant "the sky is falling and it's all because of the TEA PARTY!!!@$!@#!" stuff does get old around the 10,000th time or so. Just sayin'.

The last time the Tea Partiers even threatened not to raise the debt ceiling, the DOW plunged and our credit rating was lowered. This time around it is far more likely that they will actually go through with it, because their main demand (defunding Obamacare) is a political non-starter and they know it. So while I have NEVER written anything close to the sky is falling, the situation IS serious, and the Tea Party is to blame. Again. It's the truth, whether that gets old or not.

I don't buy this. I think the fact that we went through this last time educated the American people on how ridiculous it would be to not raise the debt ceiling, to the point that it's basically a non-starter now. That's why you saw Boehner try to push the Obamacare stuff back to the debt ceiling debate; he obviously knows defunding Obamacare is a losing proposition and the "loss" will play better if he is seen as having no choice. The Dems can give him a meaningless face-saving concession and that will be the end of it. And like i said, the nutjobs know this too, and that's why they're insisting that Obamacare defunding stay in the CR debate instead of being bumped to the debt limit.

I think we're at risk of a short shutdown so the nutjobs can claim they made their point, but there's absolutely no way we'll default. These people aren't anti-America radicals who want to take the country down, they're just idiots.

I hope you're right about this. I'd gladly accept being accused by Humpback and others as "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" if it turns out that a deal is made.

However, even if a deal IS made, I don't see any "face-saving concession" which will allow the GOP to escape total embarrassment.

 

[tommyGunZ]

even that pales in comparison to default due to failure to raise the debt limit, which is the far greater concern.

Which is why the Republican leadership wants to kick the can down the road to the debt default deadline. A debt default would be so severe (or at least so risky) that they know they'll never do it -- so they'll have a lot more leverage to find a way out.

Yup, that's exactly right. They know they're in a losing position now, but they take the heat off themselves if they push the debate to one with far greater stakes, so that when they cave on that they are in a better position to defend themselves as having acted in the best interests of the country, etc.

The nutjobs saw right through that; that's why they continue to push confrontation on the CR (even though many/most of Obamacare would remain in place even if the federal government shuts down).

Actually, you're exactly right. As I said yesterday in another thread, the insitutional Republican party will happily fold when thrown an adequate bone by the Democrats.

The "nutjobs" though are the people such as yourself who can't see that a financial crisis is coming whether you like it or not but continue to perpetuate the present socio-economic model out of greed, fear, or some blind hope that somehow things will get better if only we try harder. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. A shutdown might help to rouse some people out of their slumber.

Shutdowns have happened in the past....seems like it fits your definition of insanity (you know...the doing the same thing over and over again)

Let's try 3-4 months this time instead of just a few days and see what happens. As for the credit rating, we're already just a percentage point or two increase in interest rates away from having to service around 1 trillion dollars in immediate debt payments. The only thing preventing that is the fact that the Federal Reserve has held them artificially low through the direct purchase of trillons of dollars in securities.

We're literally just one shock away from the whole thing coming crashing down and most Americans are blissfully unaware of that. I think it's time they find out and if a shutdown is what it takes, so be it. Better now than a decade down the line when the situation is ten times worse.

I'm not sure which is worse....the group saying a shutdown would be an epic impact to anyone and everyone or the dooms dayers who think we are just a step away from a global economic melt down....all delusional if you ask me.

These people do not exist. Nobody thinks the impact of a shutdown would be "epic" on day 1. It's the risk of a prolonged shutdown that's the problem.

Sorry....it's really hard for me to tell. It's gotten to the point where I can't tell hyperbole from actual beliefs.

That's because you're so intent of placing an equal amount of fault on both sides.

 

[humpback]

Please stop

You need an alias, perhaps, Elizabeth Taylor would be suitable

You have reached Terminal Lameness

Number one news story in Washington, but I should shut up about it? Stay out of the ####### thread if it bothers you that much.

It's fine to discuss it, but the constant "the sky is falling and it's all because of the TEA PARTY!!!@$!@#!" stuff does get old around the 10,000th time or so. Just sayin'.

The last time the Tea Partiers even threatened not to raise the debt ceiling, the DOW plunged and our credit rating was lowered. This time around it is far more likely that they will actually go through with it, because their main demand (defunding Obamacare) is a political non-starter and they know it. So while I have NEVER written anything close to the sky is falling, the situation IS serious, and the Tea Party is to blame. Again. It's the truth, whether that gets old or not.

So is a crisis isn't anything close to the sky falling? Sorry, having trouble following you with your Tea Party Tourettes.

 

[B-Deep]

Though Cruz repeatedly warned his Republican colleagues that a vote to advance the Senate's budget bill was akin to supporting Obamacare, he later voted in favor of advancing the legislation.

 

[timschochet]

Please stop

You need an alias, perhaps, Elizabeth Taylor would be suitable

You have reached Terminal Lameness

Number one news story in Washington, but I should shut up about it? Stay out of the ####### thread if it bothers you that much.

It's fine to discuss it, but the constant "the sky is falling and it's all because of the TEA PARTY!!!@$!@#!" stuff does get old around the 10,000th time or so. Just sayin'.

The last time the Tea Partiers even threatened not to raise the debt ceiling, the DOW plunged and our credit rating was lowered. This time around it is far more likely that they will actually go through with it, because their main demand (defunding Obamacare) is a political non-starter and they know it. So while I have NEVER written anything close to the sky is falling, the situation IS serious, and the Tea Party is to blame. Again. It's the truth, whether that gets old or not.

So is a crisis isn't anything close to the sky falling? Sorry, having trouble following you with your Tea Party Tourettes.

If the government shuts down for any period of time, a lot of people will be hurt. Much like the sequester, that will be a crisis for those who are hurt, but not a national crisis. if the government shuts down for a long period of time (say the 3 months that TPW hopes for) that will be a more severe crisis that will affect all of us- but still not sky is falling type of crisis.

If the debt ceiling threatens not to be raised, that will also hurt a lot of people. If the debt ceiling actually is not raised, that will be a crisis, possibly a bad one. If the debt ceiling is not raised for a long period (this is very doubtful) then the sky actually would fall.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Please stop

You need an alias, perhaps, Elizabeth Taylor would be suitable

You have reached Terminal Lameness

Number one news story in Washington, but I should shut up about it? Stay out of the ####### thread if it bothers you that much.

It's fine to discuss it, but the constant "the sky is falling and it's all because of the TEA PARTY!!!@$!@#!" stuff does get old around the 10,000th time or so. Just sayin'.

The last time the Tea Partiers even threatened not to raise the debt ceiling, the DOW plunged and our credit rating was lowered. This time around it is far more likely that they will actually go through with it, because their main demand (defunding Obamacare) is a political non-starter and they know it. So while I have NEVER written anything close to the sky is falling, the situation IS serious, and the Tea Party is to blame. Again. It's the truth, whether that gets old or not.

I don't buy this. I think the fact that we went through this last time educated the American people on how ridiculous it would be to not raise the debt ceiling, to the point that it's basically a non-starter now. That's why you saw Boehner try to push the Obamacare stuff back to the debt ceiling debate; he obviously knows defunding Obamacare is a losing proposition and the "loss" will play better if he is seen as having no choice. The Dems can give him a meaningless face-saving concession and that will be the end of it. And like i said, the nutjobs know this too, and that's why they're insisting that Obamacare defunding stay in the CR debate instead of being bumped to the debt limit.

I think we're at risk of a short shutdown so the nutjobs can claim they made their point, but there's absolutely no way we'll default. These people aren't anti-America radicals who want to take the country down, they're just idiots.

I hope you're right about this. I'd gladly accept being accused by Humpback and others as "The Boy Who Cried Wolf" if it turns out that a deal is made.

However, even if a deal IS made, I don't see any "face-saving concession" which will allow the GOP to escape total embarrassment.

Keystone would be pretty meaningless since there's a decent chance the admin approves it relatively soon anyway.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Maybe have the DOE approve some of the LNG export permits that have been delayed?

 

[The Commish]

even that pales in comparison to default due to failure to raise the debt limit, which is the far greater concern.

Which is why the Republican leadership wants to kick the can down the road to the debt default deadline. A debt default would be so severe (or at least so risky) that they know they'll never do it -- so they'll have a lot more leverage to find a way out.

Yup, that's exactly right. They know they're in a losing position now, but they take the heat off themselves if they push the debate to one with far greater stakes, so that when they cave on that they are in a better position to defend themselves as having acted in the best interests of the country, etc.

The nutjobs saw right through that; that's why they continue to push confrontation on the CR (even though many/most of Obamacare would remain in place even if the federal government shuts down).

Actually, you're exactly right. As I said yesterday in another thread, the insitutional Republican party will happily fold when thrown an adequate bone by the Democrats.

The "nutjobs" though are the people such as yourself who can't see that a financial crisis is coming whether you like it or not but continue to perpetuate the present socio-economic model out of greed, fear, or some blind hope that somehow things will get better if only we try harder. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. A shutdown might help to rouse some people out of their slumber.

Shutdowns have happened in the past....seems like it fits your definition of insanity (you know...the doing the same thing over and over again)

Let's try 3-4 months this time instead of just a few days and see what happens. As for the credit rating, we're already just a percentage point or two increase in interest rates away from having to service around 1 trillion dollars in immediate debt payments. The only thing preventing that is the fact that the Federal Reserve has held them artificially low through the direct purchase of trillons of dollars in securities.

We're literally just one shock away from the whole thing coming crashing down and most Americans are blissfully unaware of that. I think it's time they find out and if a shutdown is what it takes, so be it. Better now than a decade down the line when the situation is ten times worse.

I'm not sure which is worse....the group saying a shutdown would be an epic impact to anyone and everyone or the dooms dayers who think we are just a step away from a global economic melt down....all delusional if you ask me.

These people do not exist. Nobody thinks the impact of a shutdown would be "epic" on day 1. It's the risk of a prolonged shutdown that's the problem.

Sorry....it's really hard for me to tell. It's gotten to the point where I can't tell hyperbole from actual beliefs.

That's because you're so intent of placing an equal amount of fault on both sides.

When it comes to issues like this, I hold Washington responsible. If that's what you're talking about here, then so be it. So stupid of me to hold Washington responsible for doing their job. If that's not what you're talking about then explain.

 

[TobiasFunke]

When it comes to issues like this, I hold Washington responsible. If that's what you're talking about here, then so be it. So stupid of me to hold Washington responsible for doing their job. If that's not what you're talking about then explain.

One party wants to pass a continuing resolution and raise the debt limit, the other refuses (for now) to do so unless a duly enacted law is defunded. Either you're OK with that tactic or you're not. Regardless of how you feel, blaming "Washington" really means you're blaming nobody because it gives the people on the other side a pass. It's lazy and irresponsible. If one party knows that they can demand anything they want because people will blame an impasse on "Washington" instead of bothering to understand the particulars and voting accordingly in the next election, they'll just make more ridiculous demands leading to more standoffs. Basically, you're part of the problem.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

When it comes to issues like this, I hold Washington responsible. If that's what you're talking about here, then so be it. So stupid of me to hold Washington responsible for doing their job. If that's not what you're talking about then explain.

One party wants to pass a continuing resolution and raise the debt limit, the other refuses (for now) to do so unless a duly enacted law is defunded. Either you're OK with that tactic or you're not. Regardless of how you feel, blaming "Washington" really means you're blaming nobody because it gives the people on the other side a pass. It's lazy and irresponsible. If one party knows that they can demand anything they want because people will blame an impasse on "Washington" instead of bothering to understand the particulars and voting accordingly in the next election, they'll just make more ridiculous demands leading to more standoffs. Basically, you're part of the problem.

 

[Rich Conway]

Here's a hypothetical...

Let's suppose that no significant changes are made this time, the politicians simply kick the can down the road again, and the immediate "crisis" is averted. We all know that the status quo isn't good. We all know that the status quo will eventually lead to a significant economic collapse, probably one that will make 2008 look like a walk in the park.

If that's so, when will it be the right time to endure an immediate crisis in order to fix things and avoid the bigger crisis down the road?

 

[igbomb]

When it comes to issues like this, I hold Washington responsible. If that's what you're talking about here, then so be it. So stupid of me to hold Washington responsible for doing their job. If that's not what you're talking about then explain.

One party wants to pass a continuing resolution and raise the debt limit, the other refuses (for now) to do so unless a duly enacted law is defunded. Either you're OK with that tactic or you're not. Regardless of how you feel, blaming "Washington" really means you're blaming nobody because it gives the people on the other side a pass. It's lazy and irresponsible. If one party knows that they can demand anything they want because people will blame an impasse on "Washington" instead of bothering to understand the particulars and voting accordingly in the next election, they'll just make more ridiculous demands leading to more standoffs. Basically, you're part of the problem.

I think that's a little harsh.

I'll grant that at this point in time the Repubs are the bigger problem. But it's systemic with both sides, just changes with the year.

 

[TobiasFunke]

When it comes to issues like this, I hold Washington responsible. If that's what you're talking about here, then so be it. So stupid of me to hold Washington responsible for doing their job. If that's not what you're talking about then explain.

One party wants to pass a continuing resolution and raise the debt limit, the other refuses (for now) to do so unless a duly enacted law is defunded. Either you're OK with that tactic or you're not. Regardless of how you feel, blaming "Washington" really means you're blaming nobody because it gives the people on the other side a pass. It's lazy and irresponsible. If one party knows that they can demand anything they want because people will blame an impasse on "Washington" instead of bothering to understand the particulars and voting accordingly in the next election, they'll just make more ridiculous demands leading to more standoffs. Basically, you're part of the problem.

I think that's a little harsh.

I'll grant that at this point in time the Repubs are the bigger problem. But it's systemic with both sides, just changes with the year.

I'm not taking sides in this post, although I clearly prefer one side. I'm saying that any time you blame "Washington" instead of one political party or another, you're actually giving everyone a pass. People should understand legislative debates and what's at stake in them and vote accordingly. Otherwise what motivation do these guys have to do what's right? They can continue to cater to special interests and extremists because everyone else will give them as a pass come election time.

 

[(HULK)]

This is going to royally screw things up at Walter Reed. Fortunately the military folks and contractors funded with FY13 money (the majority right now) will be able to continue working. The patient load won't be going away. If this thing goes on past a few days, please realize that dudes and chicks who gave up limbs in the Middle East will be getting crummy service or none at all. Dudes who hid in rice paddies and got put in tiger cages for months as prisoners won't be getting their mental health care. Aging vets from the greatest generation won't be getting their heart meds.

Maybe at a macro level the world keeps turning, but here, there is going to be an immediate impact starting Tuesday and it will get exponentially worse each day. Just something to keep in mind.

 

[humpback]

Please stop

You need an alias, perhaps, Elizabeth Taylor would be suitable

You have reached Terminal Lameness

Number one news story in Washington, but I should shut up about it? Stay out of the ####### thread if it bothers you that much.

It's fine to discuss it, but the constant "the sky is falling and it's all because of the TEA PARTY!!!@$!@#!" stuff does get old around the 10,000th time or so. Just sayin'.

The last time the Tea Partiers even threatened not to raise the debt ceiling, the DOW plunged and our credit rating was lowered. This time around it is far more likely that they will actually go through with it, because their main demand (defunding Obamacare) is a political non-starter and they know it. So while I have NEVER written anything close to the sky is falling, the situation IS serious, and the Tea Party is to blame. Again. It's the truth, whether that gets old or not.

So is a crisis isn't anything close to the sky falling? Sorry, having trouble following you with your Tea Party Tourettes.

If the government shuts down for any period of time, a lot of people will be hurt. Much like the sequester, that will be a crisis for those who are hurt, but not a national crisis. if the government shuts down for a long period of time (say the 3 months that TPW hopes for) that will be a more severe crisis that will affect all of us- but still not sky is falling type of crisis.

If the debt ceiling threatens not to be raised, that will also hurt a lot of people. If the debt ceiling actually is not raised, that will be a crisis, possibly a bad one. If the debt ceiling is not raised for a long period (this is very doubtful) then the sky actually would fall.

You write more words without saying anything meaningful or specific than anyone in the history of the internets.

 

[E Street Brat]

When it comes to issues like this, I hold Washington responsible. If that's what you're talking about here, then so be it. So stupid of me to hold Washington responsible for doing their job. If that's not what you're talking about then explain.

One party wants to pass a continuing resolution and raise the debt limit, the other refuses (for now) to do so unless a duly enacted law is defunded. Either you're OK with that tactic or you're not. Regardless of how you feel, blaming "Washington" really means you're blaming nobody because it gives the people on the other side a pass. It's lazy and irresponsible. If one party knows that they can demand anything they want because people will blame an impasse on "Washington" instead of bothering to understand the particulars and voting accordingly in the next election, they'll just make more ridiculous demands leading to more standoffs. Basically, you're part of the problem.

If one party wants a duly elected law funded they should pass a budget that pays for it, and stop this CR bullspit.

 

[humpback]

Here's a hypothetical...

Let's suppose that no significant changes are made this time, the politicians simply kick the can down the road again, and the immediate "crisis" is averted. We all know that the status quo isn't good. We all know that the status quo will eventually lead to a significant economic collapse, probably one that will make 2008 look like a walk in the park.

If that's so, when will it be the right time to endure an immediate crisis in order to fix things and avoid the bigger crisis down the road?

Pretty sure a significant number of people will disagree with you there.

 

[Jackstraw]

When it comes to issues like this, I hold Washington responsible. If that's what you're talking about here, then so be it. So stupid of me to hold Washington responsible for doing their job. If that's not what you're talking about then explain.

One party wants to pass a continuing resolution and raise the debt limit, the other refuses (for now) to do so unless a duly enacted law is defunded. Either you're OK with that tactic or you're not. Regardless of how you feel, blaming "Washington" really means you're blaming nobody because it gives the people on the other side a pass. It's lazy and irresponsible. If one party knows that they can demand anything they want because people will blame an impasse on "Washington" instead of bothering to understand the particulars and voting accordingly in the next election, they'll just make more ridiculous demands leading to more standoffs. Basically, you're part of the problem.

Yeah the both sides do it thing the media does is killing us. Basically a party ran on their agenda, lost the presidency, lost the senate, lost the popular vote in the house (which they hold do to extreme gerrymandering), is now telling the party that won, "implement our entire agenda or the country gets it!".

But "washington is dysfuntional" is all you'll hear.

I read a piece that the last time something so extreme happened was the civil war.

It's literally a constutional crisis in my mind.

But I'll give republicans credit. In the end they have formed the public opinion in such a way that simply agreeing to pay the bills they racked up is seen as a huge concession.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Here's a hypothetical...

Let's suppose that no significant changes are made this time, the politicians simply kick the can down the road again, and the immediate "crisis" is averted. We all know that the status quo isn't good. We all know that the status quo will eventually lead to a significant economic collapse, probably one that will make 2008 look like a walk in the park.

If that's so, when will it be the right time to endure an immediate crisis in order to fix things and avoid the bigger crisis down the road?

This sounds a lot like Democrats circa 1986.

There is no such thing as the "status quo." The budget picture changes every year. I mean technically if we maintained this "status quo" we'd be running a surplus by around 2018. I don't think it's gonna happen that way, but I don't pretend to know what will happen.

 

[Jackstraw]

Here's a hypothetical...

Let's suppose that no significant changes are made this time, the politicians simply kick the can down the road again, and the immediate "crisis" is averted. We all know that the status quo isn't good. We all know that the status quo will eventually lead to a significant economic collapse, probably one that will make 2008 look like a walk in the park.

If that's so, when will it be the right time to endure an immediate crisis in order to fix things and avoid the bigger crisis down the road?

Pretty sure a significant number of people will disagree with you there.

Yep. The minute you hear "everybody knows" your BS radar should be blowing up. The status quo is the budget deficit dropping fast by the way.