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

[timschochet]

Sean Hannity was just interviewing some Republican insider, who told him that the House Republicans were looking for a way to end the shut down by this weekend, to go along with the debt ceiling raise. I thought Hannity was going to have a meltdown on the radio.

The most hilarious part is when the insider said, "the feeling in the House is that they've been very successful in getting everything they wanted out of this shutdown, and now it's time to move on. They believe they can get more concessions out of Obama once the shutdown and the debt ceiling are out of the way."



Hannity was flabbergasted.

As he should be....they aren't getting #### out of Obama....that much is clear.

That will be awesome if they do this and then try to spin it as a success, when they gained absolutely NOTHING on Obamacare.

This moment gave me some real pause where I was really like WTF!!!!! You have to have some serious blinders on if Hannity can see what's coming but you can't. Let that sink in a little bit....holy crap!

Waitaminnut- you're saying that I couldn't see that Obama would concede nothing of value on Obamacare? When did I ever say otherwise? I predicted they might eventually give in on the device tax, but that's it.

"you" here equals "one"....not YOU specifically.

OK. Sorry I misunderstood you.

 

[jon_mx]

I would blame the idiots in Washington for being hung on not on the terms of settling this crisis, but on political posturing. However, I see the same asinine reasoning on this thread, so I guess it is not the politicians fault the people they represent are idiots too.

 

[timschochet]

Nate Silver on the political effects of the shutdown:

http://www.grantland.com/fivethirtyeight/story/_/id/9802433/nate-silver-us-government-shutdown

Too long to post here, but here's a few interesting nuggets:

Even if the shutdown were to have a moderate political impact — and one that favored the Democrats in races for Congress — it might not be enough for them to regain control of the U.S. House. Instead, Democrats face two major headwinds as they seek to win back Congress.

First, there are extremely few swing districts — only one-half to one-third as many as when the last government shutdown occurred in 1996. Some of this is because of partisan gerrymandering, but more of it is because of increasingly sharp ideological divides along geographic lines: between urban and rural areas, between the North and the South, and between the coasts and the interior of the United States.

So even if Democrats make significant gains in the number of votes they receive for the House, they would flip relatively few seats because of the way those votes are distributed. Most of the additional votes would come in districts that Democrats were already assured of winning, or where they were too far behind to catch up.

and

The increasing extent of GOP partisanship is without strong recent precedent, and contributes to the systemic uncertainty about political outcomes.

Congress has gone through periods of relatively high partisanship before — for example, at the turn of the 20th century. But the degree of polarization in the Congress is higher than at any point since the Great Depression by a variety of measures, and is possibly at its highest point ever. (Most of the evidence suggests the trend is asymmetric: Republicans in Congress have become much more conservative, while Democrats have become only somewhat more liberal.)

What this means is that, whether they assume the form of statistical models or more anecdotal takes on the evidence, conceptions based on recent history of how the negotiations might play out may not be all that reliable. That there were 17 government shutdowns between 1976 and 1996, for example, none of which persisted for more than three weeks, may not be all that meaningful since none of those came at a time when Congress was nearly as polarized as it is now. Similarly, the fact that an aggregate limit on federal debt has been in place since 1939 [PDF] may not tell us all that much. This is not to imply that the risk of a debt ceiling breach is all that high, especially given the reports of progress in budget talks as of Thursday morning.

But there's a lot we don't know.

 

[TheIronSheik]

I kind of wanted to see this place shut down. I feel like the Joker. I just wanted to watch the world burn for a little.

How Republican of you.

What would ever make you think I was Republican?

Let me guess

"I'm a Libertarian"

I'm really just hoping that chaos would spill over into Syria and we could bomb it to "clean" it up.

That goose is pretty much cooked.Even Israel can't justify a bombing run these days...

I'm cool without justifying in, to be honest.

 

[timschochet]

THE TRUCKERS HAVE ARRIVED AS PROMISED!!!

But...

A convoy of tractor-trailers planning to circle the Capital Beltway in protest of the federal government has begun its descent on the Washington area and is causing some traffic problems for the morning commute.

The “Truckers Ride for the Constitution,” which organizer Zeeda Andrews said could attract as many as 3,000 big rigs to the nation’s capital, only had about 10 participants as of 8:30 a.m.

Andrews insists the convoy is meant to be a peaceful protest rather than a traffic clog. The organizer said Thursday that reports of the trucks planning to take up three lanes of the Beltway were inaccurate, and that they should only occupy one lane of traffic.

But WNEW’s John Domen, who began following the trucks as they drove north past a truck stop on Interstate-95 in Dumfries, Va., said trucks were taking up all four lanes of the Inner Loop of the Beltway in Annandale, Va. and had slowed to 10 mph, blocking traffic from getting by.

 

[shader]

THE TRUCKERS HAVE ARRIVED AS PROMISED!!!

But...

A convoy of tractor-trailers planning to circle the Capital Beltway in protest of the federal government has begun its descent on the Washington area and is causing some traffic problems for the morning commute.

The “Truckers Ride for the Constitution,” which organizer Zeeda Andrews said could attract as many as 3,000 big rigs to the nation’s capital, only had about 10 participants as of 8:30 a.m.

Andrews insists the convoy is meant to be a peaceful protest rather than a traffic clog. The organizer said Thursday that reports of the trucks planning to take up three lanes of the Beltway were inaccurate, and that they should only occupy one lane of traffic.

But WNEW’s John Domen, who began following the trucks as they drove north past a truck stop on Interstate-95 in Dumfries, Va., said trucks were taking up all four lanes of the Inner Loop of the Beltway in Annandale, Va. and had slowed to 10 mph, blocking traffic from getting by.

Yeah it's a pretty sad story. Pretty obvious this would happen. I went to their facebook page and practically all the comments were the same "Well I can't be there personally, but I'll be rooting you on!". People like the convenience of sitting at home on their computer and "protesting".

 

[timschochet]

THE TRUCKERS HAVE ARRIVED AS PROMISED!!!

But...

A convoy of tractor-trailers planning to circle the Capital Beltway in protest of the federal government has begun its descent on the Washington area and is causing some traffic problems for the morning commute.

The “Truckers Ride for the Constitution,” which organizer Zeeda Andrews said could attract as many as 3,000 big rigs to the nation’s capital, only had about 10 participants as of 8:30 a.m.

Andrews insists the convoy is meant to be a peaceful protest rather than a traffic clog. The organizer said Thursday that reports of the trucks planning to take up three lanes of the Beltway were inaccurate, and that they should only occupy one lane of traffic.

But WNEW’s John Domen, who began following the trucks as they drove north past a truck stop on Interstate-95 in Dumfries, Va., said trucks were taking up all four lanes of the Inner Loop of the Beltway in Annandale, Va. and had slowed to 10 mph, blocking traffic from getting by.

Yeah it's a pretty sad story. Pretty obvious this would happen. I went to their facebook page and practically all the comments were the same "Well I can't be there personally, but I'll be rooting you on!". People like the convenience of sitting at home on their computer and "protesting".

Here's their anthem, per Free Republic:

We got a great big convoy travelin round the belt

We take back our freedoms, dump zer0care which smelt.

We got a great big convoy travelin round DC

We gonna stop ole zer0 from his on the constitution pee

Convoy!

 

[shader]

THE TRUCKERS HAVE ARRIVED AS PROMISED!!!

But...

A convoy of tractor-trailers planning to circle the Capital Beltway in protest of the federal government has begun its descent on the Washington area and is causing some traffic problems for the morning commute.

The “Truckers Ride for the Constitution,” which organizer Zeeda Andrews said could attract as many as 3,000 big rigs to the nation’s capital, only had about 10 participants as of 8:30 a.m.

Andrews insists the convoy is meant to be a peaceful protest rather than a traffic clog. The organizer said Thursday that reports of the trucks planning to take up three lanes of the Beltway were inaccurate, and that they should only occupy one lane of traffic.

But WNEW’s John Domen, who began following the trucks as they drove north past a truck stop on Interstate-95 in Dumfries, Va., said trucks were taking up all four lanes of the Inner Loop of the Beltway in Annandale, Va. and had slowed to 10 mph, blocking traffic from getting by.

Yeah it's a pretty sad story. Pretty obvious this would happen. I went to their facebook page and practically all the comments were the same "Well I can't be there personally, but I'll be rooting you on!". People like the convenience of sitting at home on their computer and "protesting".

Here's their anthem, per Free Republic:

We got a great big convoy travelin round the belt

We take back our freedoms, dump zer0care which smelt.

We got a great big convoy travelin round DC

We gonna stop ole zer0 from his on the constitution pee

Convoy!

I don't know what their plan was. Surround DC with thousands of trucks, and thus the US gov't would overturn Obamacare?

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Thursday's Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll hit the Republican Party like a bomb.

It found, as Gallup had, the Republican Party (and, separately, the Tea Party) at "all-time lows in the history of the poll." It found Republicans taking more blame for the shutdown than they had in 1995. It found more Americans believing the shutdown is a serious problem than in 1995.

Even worse for the GOP is what the pollsters called "the Boomerang Effect": Both President Obama and Obamacare are more popular than they were a month ago. Obamacare in particular gained seven points. (More poll highlights here, full results here.)

It's hard to overstate the magnitude of the GOP's strategic failure here: Obamacare's launch has been awful. More than a week after the federal insurance marketplaces opened, most people can't purchase insurance on the first try. But Republicans have chosen such a wildly unpopular strategy to oppose it that they've helped both Obamacare and its author in the polls.

This could've been a week when Republicans crystallized the case against Obamacare. Instead it's been a week in which they've crystallized the case against themselves.

And for what? In 2011, when Republicans last tried serious hostage taking, they managed to drive down both their numbers and President Obama's numbers. But even if they could manage that now -- and while the NBC/WSJ and Washington Post/ABC News polls both showed some improvement in Obama's numbers, an AP poll showed deterioration -- this isn't 2011.

In 2011, President Obama was going to be on the ballot against a Republican candidate who wasn't involved in the mess in Washington. The congressional GOP's kamikaze mission made sense as a way to aid an outsider challenger like Mitt Romney. But Obama won't be on any more ballots. Congressional Republicans will be. At this point, it's not a kamikaze mission. It's just suicide.

Senior Republicans -- who never wanted to be in this mess in the first place -- are increasingly desperate to get out. On Thursday, House Republicans floated a six-week delay of the debt ceiling and Senate Republicans floated a proposal that would reopen the government and raise the debt ceiling in return for repeal of the medical-device tax and a handful of other minor concessions.

Democrats didn't jump at either proposal. Their position is no policy negotiations until the government is reopened and the debt-ceiling is raised and they're seeing nothing in the polls to change their mind.

The problem for Republicans right now is they still believe they need to get something, anything, in return for funding the government and paying the bills. They promised their base concessions and they feel they need to deliver. But as of yet, they're still not prepared to give anything up -- at least not anything Democrats see as a concession.

The hope was that the pain of the shutdown and the Democrats' fear of the debt ceiling would give the GOP leverage. But all Democrats are seeing is a disaster for the GOP. And at this point, the GOP is seeing it, too.

 

[jon_mx]

Breaker one-nine, this here's the Rubber Duck, you got a copy on me Pigpen? C'mon.

Ah yeah, ten-four Pigpen, for sure, for sure. By golly it's clean clear to Flagtown. C'mon.

Yeah, that's a big ten-four there Pigpen. Yeah, we definitely got the front door good buddy. Mercy sakes alive, looks like we got us a convoy

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Opening government and raising the debt limit aren't concessions -- both things are inevitable. Why give something away to get something that's going to happen anyhow?

 

[timschochet]

Opening government and raising the debt limit aren't concessions -- both things are inevitable. Why give something away to get something that's going to happen anyhow?

In terms of the debt limit- we're 6 days away. As we get closer, we run the risk of economic downturn. According to Paul Krugman, we're still paying for what happened in 2011, when the debt ceiling was raised only a few days before it had to be.

Besides, I disagree with you that raising the debt ceiling is inevitable. It's extremely likely, but these Tea Party people make me nervous with their zealotry. So I still think that if Obama can make some kind of concession that won't hurt him, he should probably do so.

 

[TheIronSheik]

THE TRUCKERS HAVE ARRIVED AS PROMISED!!!

But...

A convoy of tractor-trailers planning to circle the Capital Beltway in protest of the federal government has begun its descent on the Washington area and is causing some traffic problems for the morning commute.

The “Truckers Ride for the Constitution,” which organizer Zeeda Andrews said could attract as many as 3,000 big rigs to the nation’s capital, only had about 10 participants as of 8:30 a.m.

Andrews insists the convoy is meant to be a peaceful protest rather than a traffic clog. The organizer said Thursday that reports of the trucks planning to take up three lanes of the Beltway were inaccurate, and that they should only occupy one lane of traffic.

But WNEW’s John Domen, who began following the trucks as they drove north past a truck stop on Interstate-95 in Dumfries, Va., said trucks were taking up all four lanes of the Inner Loop of the Beltway in Annandale, Va. and had slowed to 10 mph, blocking traffic from getting by.

Breaking news reports are saying that they tried to block a Range Rover from entering the highway and there's now some kind of chase happening. Updates to follow...

 

[CBusAlex]

Called Paul Ryan's staffers earlier today and told them that the people that actually voted for them remain behind them 100 percent.

Just because some weenie in New York soiled his panties and answered negatively in some poll doesn't mean the actual voters in a representative's district feels the same way.

No, it makes sense. I mean, why would any republican ever need the support of more than 24% of the country?

 

[Slapdash]

Opening government and raising the debt limit aren't concessions -- both things are inevitable. Why give something away to get something that's going to happen anyhow?

In terms of the debt limit- we're 6 days away. As we get closer, we run the risk of economic downturn. According to Paul Krugman, we're still paying for what happened in 2011, when the debt ceiling was raised only a few days before it had to be.

Besides, I disagree with you that raising the debt ceiling is inevitable. It's extremely likely, but these Tea Party people make me nervous with their zealotry. So I still think that if Obama can make some kind of concession that won't hurt him, he should probably do so.

Haven't heard this angle, do you have a link?

 

[timschochet]

Opening government and raising the debt limit aren't concessions -- both things are inevitable. Why give something away to get something that's going to happen anyhow?

In terms of the debt limit- we're 6 days away. As we get closer, we run the risk of economic downturn. According to Paul Krugman, we're still paying for what happened in 2011, when the debt ceiling was raised only a few days before it had to be.

Besides, I disagree with you that raising the debt ceiling is inevitable. It's extremely likely, but these Tea Party people make me nervous with their zealotry. So I still think that if Obama can make some kind of concession that won't hurt him, he should probably do so.

Haven't heard this angle, do you have a link?

I read it yesterday- the writer referred to Krugman and said that the cost of 2011 had not been paid. I'll see if I can find it.

 

[The Commish]

Opening government and raising the debt limit aren't concessions -- both things are inevitable. Why give something away to get something that's going to happen anyhow?

In terms of the debt limit- we're 6 days away. As we get closer, we run the risk of economic downturn. According to Paul Krugman, we're still paying for what happened in 2011, when the debt ceiling was raised only a few days before it had to be.

Besides, I disagree with you that raising the debt ceiling is inevitable. It's extremely likely, but these Tea Party people make me nervous with their zealotry. So I still think that if Obama can make some kind of concession that won't hurt him, he should probably do so.

Haven't heard this angle, do you have a link?

I read it yesterday- the writer referred to Krugman and said that the cost of 2011 had not been paid. I'll see if I can find it.

I'd be more interested in how the "cost" was determined.....this doesn't seem to have much bite to it. Just more hyperbole in the spin zone IMO.

 

[timschochet]

Here's one report:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/debt-ceiling-cost-taxpayers_n_2204553.html

Debt Ceiling Debate Cost Taxpayers $18.9 Billion, Study Finds

 

[The Commish]

Here's one report:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/debt-ceiling-cost-taxpayers_n_2204553.html

Debt Ceiling Debate Cost Taxpayers $18.9 Billion, Study Finds

This is the basic rationale:

That's largely the result of the government having to borrow at higher interest rates during the standoff, a time when investors feared the possibility of a default.

Seems a bit of a strawman to me....lots of causation vs correlation to be determined in all this.

 

[CBusAlex]

Here's one report:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/debt-ceiling-cost-taxpayers_n_2204553.html

Debt Ceiling Debate Cost Taxpayers $18.9 Billion, Study Finds

This is the basic rationale:

That's largely the result of the government having to borrow at higher interest rates during the standoff, a time when investors feared the possibility of a default.

Seems a bit of a strawman to me.

I don't think you know what strawman means.

 

[Slapdash]

Here's one report:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/debt-ceiling-cost-taxpayers_n_2204553.html

Debt Ceiling Debate Cost Taxpayers $18.9 Billion, Study Finds

Thanks, seems right to me. Yet another reason this whole thing is silly.

 

[jonessed]

THE TRUCKERS HAVE ARRIVED AS PROMISED!!!

But...

A convoy of tractor-trailers planning to circle the Capital Beltway in protest of the federal government has begun its descent on the Washington area and is causing some traffic problems for the morning commute.

The Truckers Ride for the Constitution, which organizer Zeeda Andrews said could attract as many as 3,000 big rigs to the nations capital, only had about 10 participants as of 8:30 a.m.

Andrews insists the convoy is meant to be a peaceful protest rather than a traffic clog. The organizer said Thursday that reports of the trucks planning to take up three lanes of the Beltway were inaccurate, and that they should only occupy one lane of traffic.

But WNEWs John Domen, who began following the trucks as they drove north past a truck stop on Interstate-95 in Dumfries, Va., said trucks were taking up all four lanes of the Inner Loop of the Beltway in Annandale, Va. and had slowed to 10 mph, blocking traffic from getting by.

Yeah it's a pretty sad story. Pretty obvious this would happen. I went to their facebook page and practically all the comments were the same "Well I can't be there personally, but I'll be rooting you on!". People like the convenience of sitting at home on their computer and "protesting".

Truckers don't sit at home much.

 

[Slapdash]

Here's one report:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/debt-ceiling-cost-taxpayers_n_2204553.html

Debt Ceiling Debate Cost Taxpayers $18.9 Billion, Study Finds

This is the basic rationale:

That's largely the result of the government having to borrow at higher interest rates during the standoff, a time when investors feared the possibility of a default.

Seems a bit of a strawman to me....lots of causation vs correlation to be determined in all this.

Not really. There isn't another event causing 1M T-Bills to spike 30 bps at auction.

 

[humpback]

Here's one report:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/debt-ceiling-cost-taxpayers_n_2204553.html

Debt Ceiling Debate Cost Taxpayers $18.9 Billion, Study Finds

This is the basic rationale:

That's largely the result of the government having to borrow at higher interest rates during the standoff, a time when investors feared the possibility of a default.

Seems a bit of a strawman to me....lots of causation vs correlation to be determined in all this.

Not really. There isn't another event causing 1M T-Bills to spike 30 bps at auction.

When did this happen?

 

[Slapdash]

Here's one report:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/debt-ceiling-cost-taxpayers_n_2204553.html

Debt Ceiling Debate Cost Taxpayers $18.9 Billion, Study Finds

This is the basic rationale:

That's largely the result of the government having to borrow at higher interest rates during the standoff, a time when investors feared the possibility of a default.

Seems a bit of a strawman to me....lots of causation vs correlation to be determined in all this.

Not really. There isn't another event causing 1M T-Bills to spike 30 bps at auction.

When did this happen?

Over the last couple of weeks: http://treasurydirect.gov/RI/OFBills

 

[Scoresman]

http://i.imgur.com/7OL4KzX.png

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

This Ted Cruz guys seems like he's up to something,

 

[humpback]

Here's one report:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/debt-ceiling-cost-taxpayers_n_2204553.html

Debt Ceiling Debate Cost Taxpayers $18.9 Billion, Study Finds

This is the basic rationale:

That's largely the result of the government having to borrow at higher interest rates during the standoff, a time when investors feared the possibility of a default.

Seems a bit of a strawman to me....lots of causation vs correlation to be determined in all this.

Not really. There isn't another event causing 1M T-Bills to spike 30 bps at auction.

When did this happen?

Over the last couple of weeks: http://treasurydirect.gov/RI/OFBills

Wait, aren't we talking about 2011?

 

[Doug B]

Nate Silver on the political effects of the shutdown:

http://www.grantland.com/fivethirtyeight/story/_/id/9802433/nate-silver-us-government-shutdown

Too long to post here, but here's a few interesting nuggets:

...

So even if Democrats make significant gains in the number of votes they receive for the House, they would flip relatively few seats because of the way those votes are distributed. Most of the additional votes would come in districts that Democrats were already assured of winning, or where they were too far behind to catch up. ...

I would think it's OK if seats don't flip from Republican to Democrat, so long as they flip from Tea Party to Republican. So long as the House, over time, trends centrist, things can be done at least somewhat more effectively. Due to the increased possibility of compromise, if nothing else.

 

[Doug B]

Called Paul Ryan's staffers earlier today and told them that the people that actually voted for them remain behind them 100 percent.
Just because some weenie in New York soiled his panties and answered negatively in some poll doesn't mean the actual voters in a representative's district feels the same way.

Be that as it may ... it's very possible for entire Congressional districts to get marginalized.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Here's one report:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/debt-ceiling-cost-taxpayers_n_2204553.html

Debt Ceiling Debate Cost Taxpayers $18.9 Billion, Study Finds

This is the basic rationale:

That's largely the result of the government having to borrow at higher interest rates during the standoff, a time when investors feared the possibility of a default.

Seems a bit of a strawman to me....lots of causation vs correlation to be determined in all this.

Not really. There isn't another event causing 1M T-Bills to spike 30 bps at auction.

Maybe the Senate should have passed the first budget the house passed.. Then we wouldn't have to worry about that..

 

[Yankee23Fan]

I wonder if there is some behind the scenes work to see if this can drag out until Ooct 16 to see the results of the special election here. If Booker actually loses, which has about a 1 in a gazillion chance of happening, maybe the GOP uses that to say they are on the right track and fight harder.

Eh, if they are doing that they are nucking futs.

 

[snogger]

Called Paul Ryan's staffers earlier today and told them that the people that actually voted for them remain behind them 100 percent.

Just because some weenie in New York soiled his panties and answered negatively in some poll doesn't mean the actual voters in a representative's district feels the same way.

No, it makes sense. I mean, why would any republican ever need the support of more than 24% of the country?

Because most of them don't care about support from the nation.. All they care about is winning their district..

After reading many quotes yesterday, the Tea Party representatives have their districts behind them no matter what it does to the country or their own party as a whole.

One quote was something along the lines of

"I have many different friends who are currently furloughed and are having a hard time making ends meet right now.. But I still think what the Tea Party is doing is right no matter what impact it has" ..

 

[Slapdash]

Here's one report:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/debt-ceiling-cost-taxpayers_n_2204553.html

Debt Ceiling Debate Cost Taxpayers $18.9 Billion, Study Finds

This is the basic rationale:

That's largely the result of the government having to borrow at higher interest rates during the standoff, a time when investors feared the possibility of a default.

Seems a bit of a strawman to me....lots of causation vs correlation to be determined in all this.

Not really. There isn't another event causing 1M T-Bills to spike 30 bps at auction.

When did this happen?

Over the last couple of weeks: http://treasurydirect.gov/RI/OFBills

Wait, aren't we talking about 2011?

I'm speaking to both. The increase in yields in 2011 was much lower than we are seeing today which underscores how costly this has already been.

 

[Scoresman]

Even the Taliban think House Republicans are stupid.

Even the Taliban is mocking the federal government shutdown.
The terrorist group that is fighting U.S. troops to return to power in Afghanistan accused politicians of "sucking the blood of their own people," reported Agence France-Presse and Al-Arabiya news service.
"The American people should realize that their politicians play with their destinies as well as the destinies of other oppressed nations for the sake of their personal vested interests," said the statement issued by the Taliban.
The White House ordered U.S. federal agencies last week to shut down and allow only "essential" employees to keep working after the House of Representatives passed a budget bill that fund the government but defunds Obamacare. The GOP-controlled House is asking President Obama to negotiate through the standoff, but he and the Democrat-controlled Senate have refused.
The Taliban, an Islamic clerical movement that ran a brutal regime based on religious law in Afghanistan before it was toppled by a U.S.-led invasion, blamed "selfish and empty-minded American leaders" for the shutdown.
It said U.S. politicians were guilty of taking U.S. citizens' money "earned with great difficulty" and then "lavishly spending the same money in shedding the blood of the innocent and oppressed people."
"Instead of sucking the blood of their own people... this money should be utilized for the sake of peace," it said, an apparent reference to the money spent keeping it from power.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/10/10/taliban-mocks-us-government-shutdown/2957821/?csp=fbfanpage

 

[humpback]

Wait, aren't we talking about 2011?

I'm speaking to both. The increase in yields in 2011 was much lower than we are seeing today which underscores how costly this has already been.

Well, the report was talking about the costs of the 2011 debate.

I couldn't find the actual report in the link, but it seems they must have done quite a bit of cherry picking to come up those increased interest costs considering rates actually fell.

 

[jon_mx]

I think GW deserves lots of credit for saving hundreds of billions on interest by driving the interest rates to zero.

 

[The Commish]

Here's one report:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/debt-ceiling-cost-taxpayers_n_2204553.html

Debt Ceiling Debate Cost Taxpayers $18.9 Billion, Study Finds

This is the basic rationale:

That's largely the result of the government having to borrow at higher interest rates during the standoff, a time when investors feared the possibility of a default.

Seems a bit of a strawman to me....lots of causation vs correlation to be determined in all this.

Not really. There isn't another event causing 1M T-Bills to spike 30 bps at auction.

Not sure I'm following. I was aware of the spike that happened just recently. Did something similar happen during the last "hostage situation"? Something's not right here....rates continued to fall during the last event didn't they?

 

[Sammy3469]

I wonder if there is some behind the scenes work to see if this can drag out until Ooct 16 to see the results of the special election here. If Booker actually loses, which has about a 1 in a gazillion chance of happening, maybe the GOP uses that to say they are on the right track and fight harder.

Eh, if they are doing that they are nucking futs.

That would imply they know what they are doing

 

[Slapdash]

Here's one report:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/28/debt-ceiling-cost-taxpayers_n_2204553.html

Debt Ceiling Debate Cost Taxpayers $18.9 Billion, Study Finds

This is the basic rationale:

That's largely the result of the government having to borrow at higher interest rates during the standoff, a time when investors feared the possibility of a default.

Seems a bit of a strawman to me....lots of causation vs correlation to be determined in all this.

Not really. There isn't another event causing 1M T-Bills to spike 30 bps at auction.

Not sure I'm following. I was aware of the spike that happened just recently. Did something similar happen during the last "hostage situation"? Something's not right here....rates continued to fall during the last event didn't they?

Rates fell after as a result of the downgrade and detoriation in Europe. This looks mostly on the long-end since short rates returned to near zero after the crisis was resolved. Not much room to fall.

Short term bills did elevate the last week of July, some doubling or tripling. You can use the link above to download historical data.

 

[jon_mx]

Terrible analogy checklist.

- Jim Crow Laws

- Slavery

- Terrorists

- Hitler

- Zimmerman

Yep, all well covered here.

- Taliban - check

Hmmm, just waiting for the child molester analogy.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Even the Taliban think House Republicans are stupid.

Even the Taliban is mocking the federal government shutdown.
The terrorist group that is fighting U.S. troops to return to power in Afghanistan accused politicians of "sucking the blood of their own people," reported Agence France-Presse and Al-Arabiya news service.
"The American people should realize that their politicians play with their destinies as well as the destinies of other oppressed nations for the sake of their personal vested interests," said the statement issued by the Taliban.
The White House ordered U.S. federal agencies last week to shut down and allow only "essential" employees to keep working after the House of Representatives passed a budget bill that fund the government but defunds Obamacare. The GOP-controlled House is asking President Obama to negotiate through the standoff, but he and the Democrat-controlled Senate have refused.
The Taliban, an Islamic clerical movement that ran a brutal regime based on religious law in Afghanistan before it was toppled by a U.S.-led invasion, blamed "selfish and empty-minded American leaders" for the shutdown.
It said U.S. politicians were guilty of taking U.S. citizens' money "earned with great difficulty" and then "lavishly spending the same money in shedding the blood of the innocent and oppressed people."
"Instead of sucking the blood of their own people... this money should be utilized for the sake of peace," it said, an apparent reference to the money spent keeping it from power.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/10/10/taliban-mocks-us-government-shutdown/2957821/?csp=fbfanpage

Some good points made there, but it's laughable that you claim they directed any of that against 1 political group.. It's obvious to everyone that isn't a shill (like most in this forum) that this isn't an issue with just 1 political group..

 

[timschochet]

Why am I not surprised that Carolina Hustler would join the "both sides are to blame" crowd?

 

[jon_mx]

Even the Taliban think House Republicans are stupid.

Even the Taliban is mocking the federal government shutdown.
The terrorist group that is fighting U.S. troops to return to power in Afghanistan accused politicians of "sucking the blood of their own people," reported Agence France-Presse and Al-Arabiya news service.
"The American people should realize that their politicians play with their destinies as well as the destinies of other oppressed nations for the sake of their personal vested interests," said the statement issued by the Taliban.
The White House ordered U.S. federal agencies last week to shut down and allow only "essential" employees to keep working after the House of Representatives passed a budget bill that fund the government but defunds Obamacare. The GOP-controlled House is asking President Obama to negotiate through the standoff, but he and the Democrat-controlled Senate have refused.
The Taliban, an Islamic clerical movement that ran a brutal regime based on religious law in Afghanistan before it was toppled by a U.S.-led invasion, blamed "selfish and empty-minded American leaders" for the shutdown.
It said U.S. politicians were guilty of taking U.S. citizens' money "earned with great difficulty" and then "lavishly spending the same money in shedding the blood of the innocent and oppressed people."
"Instead of sucking the blood of their own people... this money should be utilized for the sake of peace," it said, an apparent reference to the money spent keeping it from power.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...us-government-shutdown/2957821/?csp=fbfanpagehttp://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/10/10/taliban-mocks-us-government-shutdown/2957821/?csp=fbfanpage
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...us-government-shutdown/2957821/?csp=fbfanpage[/indent]

I missed the part where the Taliban singled out the GOP House.

 

[TheIronSheik]

Why am I not surprised that Carolina Hustler would join the "both sides are to blame" crowd?

Why do you act like your position is the 100% correct one?

 

[jon_mx]

Why am I not surprised that Carolina Hustler would join the "both sides are to blame" crowd?

For the same reason it is no surprise you take the MSNBC angle.

ETA: And in fairness to Carloina, Scoresman is obviously been the biggest troll on the thread for several days now. And it is not even close. Why not direct your criticism there?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Why am I not surprised that Carolina Hustler would join the "both sides are to blame" crowd?

Well the reality is that the Republicans offered a spending bill that would keep everything running.. Senate rejected it because there was no appropriation for Obamacare (which is a disaster).. All of this could have been avoided..

 

[timschochet]

Why am I not surprised that Carolina Hustler would join the "both sides are to blame" crowd?

Why do you act like your position is the 100% correct one?

As I've pointed out before, if almost all progressives and independents say that conservatives are to blame, but conservatives say both sides are to blame, that should be a good indication that conservatives are to blame.

 

[RCon]

Why am I not surprised that Carolina Hustler would join the "both sides are to blame" crowd?

For the same reason it is no surprise you take the MSNBC angle.

ETA: And in fairness to Carloina, Scoresman is obviously been the biggest troll on the thread for several days now. And it is not even close. Why not direct your criticism there?

There's no shortage of political trolls in the FFA.

 

[TheIronSheik]

Why am I not surprised that Carolina Hustler would join the "both sides are to blame" crowd?

Why do you act like your position is the 100% correct one?

As I've pointed out before, if almost all progressives and independents say that conservatives are to blame, but conservatives say both sides are to blame, that should be a good indication that conservatives are to blame.

That's solid proof, right there.