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

[tommyGunZ]

Tommy, just to be clear: one part (a small part) of the reason I voted for Romney is because I wanted to see Obamacare defunded or repealed. I don't like Obamacare. I don't hate it, but I don't like it; I think it makes things worse, and I would be glad to see it gone. But Romney lost that election. The American public decided they wanted 4 more years of President Obama, and obviously Obamacare is part of that package. So be it.

Now the House Republicans want to blackmail Obama: either Obamacare is "delayed" (which means it will never go through) or the government is shut down and the debt ceiling won't be raised. It's terrible. It's a foolish way to govern. It could turn into an economic disaster. And it's exactly the sort of thing I have feared from the moment the Tea Party became prominent in conservative politics.

So from a policy standpoint, you agree with the Tea Party (repeal Obamacare). You just don't believe in their tactics.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Serious question.

Has there ever been a conservative that went out of his way to distance himself from being a conservative more than tim? It's fascinating to watch sometimes.

I am not a conservative. I a moderate with certain fiscal conservative views.

Exhibit A.

 

[timschochet]

Tommy, just to be clear: one part (a small part) of the reason I voted for Romney is because I wanted to see Obamacare defunded or repealed. I don't like Obamacare. I don't hate it, but I don't like it; I think it makes things worse, and I would be glad to see it gone. But Romney lost that election. The American public decided they wanted 4 more years of President Obama, and obviously Obamacare is part of that package. So be it.

Now the House Republicans want to blackmail Obama: either Obamacare is "delayed" (which means it will never go through) or the government is shut down and the debt ceiling won't be raised. It's terrible. It's a foolish way to govern. It could turn into an economic disaster. And it's exactly the sort of thing I have feared from the moment the Tea Party became prominent in conservative politics.

So from a policy standpoint, you agree with the Tea Party (repeal Obamacare). You just don't believe in their tactics.

It's too late to repeal Obamacare. At this point I would hope for some changes to make it more palatable.

But I have never agreed with the Tea Party that Obamacare is a danger to American liberty, or whatever crap they are currently spewing.

 

[Dr Oadi]

Tommy, just to be clear: one part (a small part) of the reason I voted for Romney is because I wanted to see Obamacare defunded or repealed. I don't like Obamacare. I don't hate it, but I don't like it; I think it makes things worse, and I would be glad to see it gone. But Romney lost that election. The American public decided they wanted 4 more years of President Obama, and obviously Obamacare is part of that package. So be it.

Now the House Republicans want to blackmail Obama: either Obamacare is "delayed" (which means it will never go through) or the government is shut down and the debt ceiling won't be raised. It's terrible. It's a foolish way to govern. It could turn into an economic disaster. And it's exactly the sort of thing I have feared from the moment the Tea Party became prominent in conservative politics.

So from a policy standpoint, you agree with the Tea Party (repeal Obamacare). You just don't believe in their tactics.

It's too late to repeal Obamacare. At this point I would hope for some changes to make it more palatable.But I have never agreed with the Tea Party that Obamacare is a danger to American liberty, or whatever crap they are currently spewing.

Nothing screams liberty more than the governments ability to mandate you insure yourself.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Tommy, just to be clear: one part (a small part) of the reason I voted for Romney is because I wanted to see Obamacare defunded or repealed. I don't like Obamacare. I don't hate it, but I don't like it; I think it makes things worse, and I would be glad to see it gone. But Romney lost that election. The American public decided they wanted 4 more years of President Obama, and obviously Obamacare is part of that package. So be it.

Now the House Republicans want to blackmail Obama: either Obamacare is "delayed" (which means it will never go through) or the government is shut down and the debt ceiling won't be raised. It's terrible. It's a foolish way to govern. It could turn into an economic disaster. And it's exactly the sort of thing I have feared from the moment the Tea Party became prominent in conservative politics.

So from a policy standpoint, you agree with the Tea Party (repeal Obamacare). You just don't believe in their tactics.

It's too late to repeal Obamacare. At this point I would hope for some changes to make it more palatable.But I have never agreed with the Tea Party that Obamacare is a danger to American liberty, or whatever crap they are currently spewing.

Nothing screams liberty more than the governments ability to mandate you insure yourself.

Not having lives ruined by a someone getting sick or injured screams liberty.

 

[Rayderr]

Tommy, just to be clear: one part (a small part) of the reason I voted for Romney is because I wanted to see Obamacare defunded or repealed. I don't like Obamacare. I don't hate it, but I don't like it; I think it makes things worse, and I would be glad to see it gone. But Romney lost that election. The American public decided they wanted 4 more years of President Obama, and obviously Obamacare is part of that package. So be it.

Now the House Republicans want to blackmail Obama: either Obamacare is "delayed" (which means it will never go through) or the government is shut down and the debt ceiling won't be raised. It's terrible. It's a foolish way to govern. It could turn into an economic disaster. And it's exactly the sort of thing I have feared from the moment the Tea Party became prominent in conservative politics.

So from a policy standpoint, you agree with the Tea Party (repeal Obamacare). You just don't believe in their tactics.

It's too late to repeal Obamacare. At this point I would hope for some changes to make it more palatable.But I have never agreed with the Tea Party that Obamacare is a danger to American liberty, or whatever crap they are currently spewing.

Nothing screams liberty more than the governments ability to mandate you insure yourself.

Not having lives ruined by a someone getting sick or injured screams liberty.

It does?

liberty  Use Liberty in a sentence
lib·er·ty[lib-er-tee]
noun, plural lib·er·ties.1. freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control.
2. freedom from external or foreign rule; independence.
3. freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.
4. freedom from captivity, confinement, or physical restraint: The prisoner soon regained his liberty.

 

[jonessed]

Serious question.

Has there ever been a conservative that went out of his way to distance himself from being a conservative more than tim? It's fascinating to watch sometimes.

He's politically schizophrenic. Trying to have a conversation with him feels like dealing with my bipolar cousin. You never know which version you are going to get or when things will go sideways. It's best just to keep things short and and nod a lot (or just observe others who haven't learned that lesson).

 

[timschochet]

Serious question.

Has there ever been a conservative that went out of his way to distance himself from being a conservative more than tim? It's fascinating to watch sometimes.

He's politically schizophrenic. Trying to have a conversation with him feels like dealing with my bipolar cousin. You never know which version you are going to get or when things will go sideways. It's best just to keep things short and and nod a lot (or just observe others who haven't learned that lesson).

Anything to have to avoid the fact that the House Republicans are acting like complete buffoons. Of course let's make this all about me. I'd rather be . "schizophrenic" than be slavishly loyal to a rigid conservatism no matter what the circumstances, as you seem to be.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Apparently they're really going to do it. I was really hoping I would be wrong about this and that it was all a bluff. But it looks as if the government is about to be shutdown come tomorrow.

Its amazing democrats are willing to shut down the gov't for obamacare.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Tommy, just to be clear: one part (a small part) of the reason I voted for Romney is because I wanted to see Obamacare defunded or repealed. I don't like Obamacare. I don't hate it, but I don't like it; I think it makes things worse, and I would be glad to see it gone. But Romney lost that election. The American public decided they wanted 4 more years of President Obama, and obviously Obamacare is part of that package. So be it.

Now the House Republicans want to blackmail Obama: either Obamacare is "delayed" (which means it will never go through) or the government is shut down and the debt ceiling won't be raised. It's terrible. It's a foolish way to govern. It could turn into an economic disaster. And it's exactly the sort of thing I have feared from the moment the Tea Party became prominent in conservative politics.

So from a policy standpoint, you agree with the Tea Party (repeal Obamacare). You just don't believe in their tactics.

It's too late to repeal Obamacare. At this point I would hope for some changes to make it more palatable.But I have never agreed with the Tea Party that Obamacare is a danger to American liberty, or whatever crap they are currently spewing.

Nothing screams liberty more than the governments ability to mandate you insure yourself.

Not having lives ruined by a someone getting sick or injured screams liberty.

It does?

liberty   Use Liberty in a sentence
lib·er·ty [lib-er-tee]
noun, plural lib·er·ties.1. freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control.
2. freedom from external or foreign rule; independence.
3. freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.
4. freedom from captivity, confinement, or physical restraint: The prisoner soon regained his liberty.

Those without economic security really don't have much liberty.

 

[timschochet]

This is the part that jonessed and other conservatives here don't want to acknowledge:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/broken-windows-broken-states

For all the ubiquity of political polarizing and heightened partisanship, no honest observer can deny that the rise of crisis governance and various forms of legislative hostage taking comes entirely from the GOP. I hesitate to state it so baldly because inevitably it cuts off the discussion with at least a sizable minority of the political nation. But there's no way to grapple with the issue without being clear on this single underlying reality. Sufficient evidence of this comes from 2007 and 2008 when Democrats won resounding majorities in Congress and adopted exactly none of these tactics with an already quite unpopular President Bush. This is the reality that finally brought Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein, two of DC's most arbiters of political standards and practices, fastidiously sober, even-handed and high-minded, to finally just throw up their hands mid-last-year and say "Let's just say it: The Republicans are the problem."

The only correction I would make is this: it's not the entire Republican party. It's the Tea Party. But the Republican leadership is guilty for giving into them.

 

[Rayderr]

Tommy, just to be clear: one part (a small part) of the reason I voted for Romney is because I wanted to see Obamacare defunded or repealed. I don't like Obamacare. I don't hate it, but I don't like it; I think it makes things worse, and I would be glad to see it gone. But Romney lost that election. The American public decided they wanted 4 more years of President Obama, and obviously Obamacare is part of that package. So be it.

Now the House Republicans want to blackmail Obama: either Obamacare is "delayed" (which means it will never go through) or the government is shut down and the debt ceiling won't be raised. It's terrible. It's a foolish way to govern. It could turn into an economic disaster. And it's exactly the sort of thing I have feared from the moment the Tea Party became prominent in conservative politics.

So from a policy standpoint, you agree with the Tea Party (repeal Obamacare). You just don't believe in their tactics.

It's too late to repeal Obamacare. At this point I would hope for some changes to make it more palatable.But I have never agreed with the Tea Party that Obamacare is a danger to American liberty, or whatever crap they are currently spewing.

Nothing screams liberty more than the governments ability to mandate you insure yourself.

Not having lives ruined by a someone getting sick or injured screams liberty.

It does?

liberty   Use Liberty in a sentence
lib·er·ty [lib-er-tee]
noun, plural lib·er·ties.1. freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control.
2. freedom from external or foreign rule; independence.
3. freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.
4. freedom from captivity, confinement, or physical restraint: The prisoner soon regained his liberty.

Those without economic security really don't have much liberty.

That's a stretch at best and you know it.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Tommy, just to be clear: one part (a small part) of the reason I voted for Romney is because I wanted to see Obamacare defunded or repealed. I don't like Obamacare. I don't hate it, but I don't like it; I think it makes things worse, and I would be glad to see it gone. But Romney lost that election. The American public decided they wanted 4 more years of President Obama, and obviously Obamacare is part of that package. So be it.

Now the House Republicans want to blackmail Obama: either Obamacare is "delayed" (which means it will never go through) or the government is shut down and the debt ceiling won't be raised. It's terrible. It's a foolish way to govern. It could turn into an economic disaster. And it's exactly the sort of thing I have feared from the moment the Tea Party became prominent in conservative politics.

So from a policy standpoint, you agree with the Tea Party (repeal Obamacare). You just don't believe in their tactics.

It's too late to repeal Obamacare. At this point I would hope for some changes to make it more palatable.But I have never agreed with the Tea Party that Obamacare is a danger to American liberty, or whatever crap they are currently spewing.

Nothing screams liberty more than the governments ability to mandate you insure yourself.

Not having lives ruined by a someone getting sick or injured screams liberty.

It does?

liberty   Use Liberty in a sentence
lib·er·ty [lib-er-tee]
noun, plural lib·er·ties.1. freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control.
2. freedom from external or foreign rule; independence.
3. freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.
4. freedom from captivity, confinement, or physical restraint: The prisoner soon regained his liberty.

Those without economic security really don't have much liberty.

That's a stretch at best and you know it.

We are talking healthcare here, but you honestly don't believe that I believe the first two paragraphs supporting this classic conservative idea?

 

[Rayderr]

Tommy, just to be clear: one part (a small part) of the reason I voted for Romney is because I wanted to see Obamacare defunded or repealed. I don't like Obamacare. I don't hate it, but I don't like it; I think it makes things worse, and I would be glad to see it gone. But Romney lost that election. The American public decided they wanted 4 more years of President Obama, and obviously Obamacare is part of that package. So be it.

Now the House Republicans want to blackmail Obama: either Obamacare is "delayed" (which means it will never go through) or the government is shut down and the debt ceiling won't be raised. It's terrible. It's a foolish way to govern. It could turn into an economic disaster. And it's exactly the sort of thing I have feared from the moment the Tea Party became prominent in conservative politics.

So from a policy standpoint, you agree with the Tea Party (repeal Obamacare). You just don't believe in their tactics.

It's too late to repeal Obamacare. At this point I would hope for some changes to make it more palatable.But I have never agreed with the Tea Party that Obamacare is a danger to American liberty, or whatever crap they are currently spewing.

Nothing screams liberty more than the governments ability to mandate you insure yourself.

Not having lives ruined by a someone getting sick or injured screams liberty.

It does?

liberty   Use Liberty in a sentence
lib·er·ty [lib-er-tee]
noun, plural lib·er·ties.1. freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control.
2. freedom from external or foreign rule; independence.
3. freedom from control, interference, obligation, restriction, hampering conditions, etc.; power or right of doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.
4. freedom from captivity, confinement, or physical restraint: The prisoner soon regained his liberty.

Those without economic security really don't have much liberty.

That's a stretch at best and you know it.

We are talking healthcare here, but you honestly don't believe that I believe the first two paragraphs supporting this classic conservative idea?

I thought we were talking about liberty?

 

[timschochet]

Talking about liberty one way or another in reference to Obamacare is pretty nonsensical IMO. Before it's passage the government was heavily involved in healthcare. If Obamacare never passed the government would be heavily involved in healthcare. The demonization of Obamacare by the Tea Party would be laughable, except for the fact that it's so damaging.

 

[17seconds]

The Tea Party & Duck Dynasty are pretty much the only things keeping America alive.

You say that like it's 2 different things

 

[eaganwildcats]

This is the part that jonessed and other conservatives here don't want to acknowledge:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/broken-windows-broken-states

For all the ubiquity of political polarizing and heightened partisanship, no honest observer can deny that the rise of crisis governance and various forms of legislative hostage taking comes entirely from the GOP. I hesitate to state it so baldly because inevitably it cuts off the discussion with at least a sizable minority of the political nation. But there's no way to grapple with the issue without being clear on this single underlying reality. Sufficient evidence of this comes from 2007 and 2008 when Democrats won resounding majorities in Congress and adopted exactly none of these tactics with an already quite unpopular President Bush. This is the reality that finally brought Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein, two of DC's most arbiters of political standards and practices, fastidiously sober, even-handed and high-minded, to finally just throw up their hands mid-last-year and say "Let's just say it: The Republicans are the problem."

The only correction I would make is this: it's not the entire Republican party. It's the Tea Party. But the Republican leadership is guilty for giving into them.

At this point, who does this even refer to? Boehner? Priebus? There is no Republican leadership at this point - only independent pockets of power who are wholly concerned with their own interests and feel no loyalty to the so-called Republican Establishment.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Talking about liberty one way or another in reference to Obamacare is pretty nonsensical IMO. Before it's passage the government was heavily involved in healthcare. If Obamacare never passed the government would be heavily involved in healthcare. The demonization of Obamacare by the Tea Party would be laughable, except for the fact that it's so damaging.

Says the guy that believes that the government must be plugged into our private communication to promote liberty,. The same idea that restricting one liberty promotes other, greater liberties applies here. Well except that it actually applies here.

 

[timschochet]

Talking about liberty one way or another in reference to Obamacare is pretty nonsensical IMO. Before it's passage the government was heavily involved in healthcare. If Obamacare never passed the government would be heavily involved in healthcare. The demonization of Obamacare by the Tea Party would be laughable, except for the fact that it's so damaging.

Says the guy that believes that the government must be plugged into our private communication to promote liberty,. The same idea that restricting one liberty promotes other, greater liberties applies here. Well except that it actually applies here.

I get your point, though I disagree, obviously. But it's way off topic to discuss the NRA in this thread. I'm betting that, despite your desire to cut me down a bit (which is fine) I'm betting you agree with my larger point: that in the bigger scheme of things, to claim that Obamacare, as opposed to other government actions, is especially onerous in terms of liberty infringement is pretty asinine.

 

[timschochet]

This is the part that jonessed and other conservatives here don't want to acknowledge:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/broken-windows-broken-states

For all the ubiquity of political polarizing and heightened partisanship, no honest observer can deny that the rise of crisis governance and various forms of legislative hostage taking comes entirely from the GOP. I hesitate to state it so baldly because inevitably it cuts off the discussion with at least a sizable minority of the political nation. But there's no way to grapple with the issue without being clear on this single underlying reality. Sufficient evidence of this comes from 2007 and 2008 when Democrats won resounding majorities in Congress and adopted exactly none of these tactics with an already quite unpopular President Bush. This is the reality that finally brought Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein, two of DC's most arbiters of political standards and practices, fastidiously sober, even-handed and high-minded, to finally just throw up their hands mid-last-year and say "Let's just say it: The Republicans are the problem."

The only correction I would make is this: it's not the entire Republican party. It's the Tea Party. But the Republican leadership is guilty for giving into them.

At this point, who does this even refer to? Boehner? Priebus? There is no Republican leadership at this point - only independent pockets of power who are wholly concerned with their own interests and feel no loyalty to the so-called Republican Establishment.

Right now I'm specifically referring to Boehner. In a larger sense, Mitch McConnell as well, and several other people I could name.

There is an analogy here between the Republican party today, and the Republican party of the 1950s- back then, they allowed a populist idiot named Joseph McCarthy to take over, and the Republicans in leadership who knew better stayed silent, mostly out of fear. The same thing is happening today, except that the Tea Party is much more dangerous for this country than McCarthy was, because their primary concerns are economic rather than social or political- as such, their impact is far greater IMO.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Talking about liberty one way or another in reference to Obamacare is pretty nonsensical IMO. Before it's passage the government was heavily involved in healthcare. If Obamacare never passed the government would be heavily involved in healthcare. The demonization of Obamacare by the Tea Party would be laughable, except for the fact that it's so damaging.

Says the guy that believes that the government must be plugged into our private communication to promote liberty,. The same idea that restricting one liberty promotes other, greater liberties applies here. Well except that it actually applies here.

I get your point, though I disagree, obviously. But it's way off topic to discuss the NRA in this thread. I'm betting that, despite your desire to cut me down a bit (which is fine) I'm betting you agree with my larger point: that in the bigger scheme of things, to claim that Obamacare, as opposed to other government actions, is especially onerous in terms of liberty infringement is pretty asinine.

I merely addressed these questions-

1) What does being financially devastated have to do with liberty?

2) Can the government promote/protect liberty by restricting it?

The shot at you seemed to be the most effective means to make several points. Since you stayed on your "high horse" it appears to have failed.

As to your question. The individual mandate is kind of weakly implemented with rather token penalties so at present it is not much of an infringement. But assuming that the mandate sticks and the penalties go up to enforce it there will need to be an awful lot of measurable societal gains to make them legitimate usage of government powers to counter the infringement on individual liberty. I doubt however that we will ever have penalties high enough to find out until those penalties are simply the taxes that pay for single payer.

What is asinine is the right shutting down government because the left keeps legislating the right's policy proposals.

 

[The Commish]

The Tea Party & Duck Dynasty are pretty much the only things keeping America alive.

You say that like it's 2 different things

Damn...what did Duck Dynasty do to you to deserve that?!

 

[culdeus]

Will the shutdown last longer than the Cruz fillabuster?

Will we end up writing checks to all the people that didn't go into work again?

 

[tommyGunZ]

This is the part that jonessed and other conservatives here don't want to acknowledge:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/broken-windows-broken-states

For all the ubiquity of political polarizing and heightened partisanship, no honest observer can deny that the rise of crisis governance and various forms of legislative hostage taking comes entirely from the GOP. I hesitate to state it so baldly because inevitably it cuts off the discussion with at least a sizable minority of the political nation. But there's no way to grapple with the issue without being clear on this single underlying reality. Sufficient evidence of this comes from 2007 and 2008 when Democrats won resounding majorities in Congress and adopted exactly none of these tactics with an already quite unpopular President Bush. This is the reality that finally brought Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein, two of DC's most arbiters of political standards and practices, fastidiously sober, even-handed and high-minded, to finally just throw up their hands mid-last-year and say "Let's just say it: The Republicans are the problem."

The only correction I would make is this: it's not the entire Republican party. It's the Tea Party. But the Republican leadership is guilty for giving into them.

At this point, who does this even refer to? Boehner? Priebus? There is no Republican leadership at this point - only independent pockets of power who are wholly concerned with their own interests and feel no loyalty to the so-called Republican Establishment.

Right now I'm specifically referring to Boehner. In a larger sense, Mitch McConnell as well, and several other people I could name.

There is an analogy here between the Republican party today, and the Republican party of the 1950s- back then, they allowed a populist idiot named Joseph McCarthy to take over, and the Republicans in leadership who knew better stayed silent, mostly out of fear. The same thing is happening today, except that the Tea Party is much more dangerous for this country than McCarthy was, because their primary concerns are economic rather than social or political- as such, their impact is far greater IMO.

Economic policy that you support.

 

[timschochet]

This is the part that jonessed and other conservatives here don't want to acknowledge:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/broken-windows-broken-states

For all the ubiquity of political polarizing and heightened partisanship, no honest observer can deny that the rise of crisis governance and various forms of legislative hostage taking comes entirely from the GOP. I hesitate to state it so baldly because inevitably it cuts off the discussion with at least a sizable minority of the political nation. But there's no way to grapple with the issue without being clear on this single underlying reality. Sufficient evidence of this comes from 2007 and 2008 when Democrats won resounding majorities in Congress and adopted exactly none of these tactics with an already quite unpopular President Bush. This is the reality that finally brought Thomas Mann and Norm Ornstein, two of DC's most arbiters of political standards and practices, fastidiously sober, even-handed and high-minded, to finally just throw up their hands mid-last-year and say "Let's just say it: The Republicans are the problem."

The only correction I would make is this: it's not the entire Republican party. It's the Tea Party. But the Republican leadership is guilty for giving into them.

At this point, who does this even refer to? Boehner? Priebus? There is no Republican leadership at this point - only independent pockets of power who are wholly concerned with their own interests and feel no loyalty to the so-called Republican Establishment.

Right now I'm specifically referring to Boehner. In a larger sense, Mitch McConnell as well, and several other people I could name.

There is an analogy here between the Republican party today, and the Republican party of the 1950s- back then, they allowed a populist idiot named Joseph McCarthy to take over, and the Republicans in leadership who knew better stayed silent, mostly out of fear. The same thing is happening today, except that the Tea Party is much more dangerous for this country than McCarthy was, because their primary concerns are economic rather than social or political- as such, their impact is far greater IMO.

Economic policy that you support.

No it isn't. There is a broad difference between what they want and what I want.

 

[Politician Spock]

Everytime tim speaks of populists, I can't help but think of Bill Cosby's Jello Puddin' Pops commercials.

 

[timschochet]

Everytime tim speaks of populists, I can't help but think of Bill Cosby's Jello Puddin' Pops commercials.

Whatever. What the #### difference does it make what I think? The Republicans are going to shut down the government on Tuesday. I didn't think they'd go through with it. But they're actually going to go through with it. Unreal. All along, despite my #####ing and moaning, I was sort of hoping that I was wrong about the Tea Party, that in the end they'd never pull this ####. But they're going to pull this ####.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Tommy, just to be clear: one part (a small part) of the reason I voted for Romney is because I wanted to see Obamacare defunded or repealed. I don't like Obamacare. I don't hate it, but I don't like it; I think it makes things worse, and I would be glad to see it gone. But Romney lost that election. ...

It's too late to repeal Obamacare. At this point I would hope for some changes to make it more palatable.

By the way explain what has changed between 1/20/13 and 10/1/13 which makes defunding ObamaCare with the new Romney admin desirable, but now too late nine months later?

Obama winning the election changed the prospects of defunding ObamaCare, but assuming that is your change how would that electoral win change the appropriateness of the policy choice?

 

[Mario Kart]

Everytime tim speaks of populists, I can't help but think of Bill Cosby's Jello Puddin' Pops commercials.

Whatever. What the #### difference does it make what I think? The Republicans are going to shut down the government on Tuesday. I didn't think they'd go through with it. But they're actually going to go through with it. Unreal. All along, despite my #####ing and moaning, I was sort of hoping that I was wrong about the Tea Party, that in the end they'd never pull this ####. But they're going to pull this ####.

Reid is shutting down the government.

 

[Politician Spock]

Everytime tim speaks of populists, I can't help but think of Bill Cosby's Jello Puddin' Pops commercials.

Whatever. What the #### difference does it make what I think? The Republicans are going to shut down the government on Tuesday. I didn't think they'd go through with it. But they're actually going to go through with it. Unreal. All along, despite my #####ing and moaning, I was sort of hoping that I was wrong about the Tea Party, that in the end they'd never pull this ####. But they're going to pull this ####.

They're made with 60% milk, so mom knows they're wholesome.

 

[timschochet]

Tommy, just to be clear: one part (a small part) of the reason I voted for Romney is because I wanted to see Obamacare defunded or repealed. I don't like Obamacare. I don't hate it, but I don't like it; I think it makes things worse, and I would be glad to see it gone. But Romney lost that election. ...

It's too late to repeal Obamacare. At this point I would hope for some changes to make it more palatable.

By the way explain what has changed between 1/20/13 and 10/1/13 which makes defunding ObamaCare with the new Romney admin desirable, but now too late nine months later?

Obama winning the election changed the prospects of defunding ObamaCare, but assuming that is your change how would that electoral win change the appropriateness of the policy choice?

The change is between 11/6/12 and 10/1/13. There were other reasons, beyond Obamacare, that I voted for Romney.

I don't want to discuss Obamacare in this thread. I've discussed my feelings about it, at length, in other threads. I think that in terms of the threatened shutdown and debt ceiling debacle, Obamacare is just an excuse anyhow. The Tea Party wants to stick it to Obama, and they're willing to blow up the government to do it.

 

[timschochet]

Everytime tim speaks of populists, I can't help but think of Bill Cosby's Jello Puddin' Pops commercials.

Whatever. What the #### difference does it make what I think? The Republicans are going to shut down the government on Tuesday. I didn't think they'd go through with it. But they're actually going to go through with it. Unreal. All along, despite my #####ing and moaning, I was sort of hoping that I was wrong about the Tea Party, that in the end they'd never pull this ####. But they're going to pull this ####.

Reid is shutting down the government.

No he isn't. I have to assume you're just ####### with me, because I know that no reasonable person could believe this. Reid is a #####, but this is solely on the Republicans.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

... Obamacare is just an excuse anyhow. The Tea Party wants to stick it to Obama, and they're willing to blow up the government to do it.

Of course. The Tea Party that formed in late 2008 didn't survive the influx of the bitter right that spring of '09. Such a shame.

 

[Politician Spock]

... Obamacare is just an excuse anyhow. The Tea Party wants to stick it to Obama, and they're willing to blow up the government to do it.

Of course. The Tea Party that formed in late 2008 didn't survive the influx of the bitter right that spring of '09. Such a shame.

The Tea Party pre-Koch brothers and the Tea Party post-Koch brothers are two different entities entirely.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

... Obamacare is just an excuse anyhow. The Tea Party wants to stick it to Obama, and they're willing to blow up the government to do it.

Of course. The Tea Party that formed in late 2008 didn't survive the influx of the bitter right that spring of '09. Such a shame.

The Tea Party pre-Koch brothers and the Tea Party post-Koch brothers are two different entities entirely.

Again - such a shame!

ETA: So maybe I should have said the winter of '09.

 

[timschochet]

... Obamacare is just an excuse anyhow. The Tea Party wants to stick it to Obama, and they're willing to blow up the government to do it.

Of course. The Tea Party that formed in late 2008 didn't survive the influx of the bitter right that spring of '09. Such a shame.

The Tea Party pre-Koch brothers and the Tea Party post-Koch brothers are two different entities entirely.

I think the Koch brothers spent money on the Tea Party and provided a lot of the impetus. But I don't believe they control it- not any longer. IMO, there is nobody controlling these guys.

The Koch brothers are too savvy to be in favor of not raising the debt ceiling. This thing has blown up way beyond them.

 

[timschochet]

Wow, Rachel Maddow nails it in her blog:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/09/27/20720952-default-deniers-demand-to-be-heard

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that debt-ceiling polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics. Regular folks have no idea what the debt ceiling is, what default is, what bond markets are, or what the full faith and credit of the United States means, so polling on the subject tells us nothing.

But what happens when elected federal lawmakers -- the same people who have a responsibility to pay the nation's bills -- are every bit as ignorant as confused constituents?

 

[jon_mx]

Wow, Rachel Maddow nails it in her blog:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/09/27/20720952-default-deniers-demand-to-be-heard

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that debt-ceiling polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics. Regular folks have no idea what the debt ceiling is, what default is, what bond markets are, or what the full faith and credit of the United States means, so polling on the subject tells us nothing.

But what happens when elected federal lawmakers -- the same people who have a responsibility to pay the nation's bills -- are every bit as ignorant as confused constituents?

You could also just as accurately state the followig:

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Obamacare polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Gun control polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Education polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Global Warming polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Government Spending polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

That statement only 'nails it' if you are an elitist pig who does not believe in Democracy except when it fits your own agenda.

 

[timschochet]

Wow, Rachel Maddow nails it in her blog:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/09/27/20720952-default-deniers-demand-to-be-heard

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that debt-ceiling polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics. Regular folks have no idea what the debt ceiling is, what default is, what bond markets are, or what the full faith and credit of the United States means, so polling on the subject tells us nothing.

But what happens when elected federal lawmakers -- the same people who have a responsibility to pay the nation's bills -- are every bit as ignorant as confused constituents?

You could also just as accurately state the followig:

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Obamacare polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Gun control polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Education polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Global Warming polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Government Spending polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

That statement only 'nails it' if you are an elitist pig who does not believe in Democracy except when it fits your own agenda.

But it's not true, and all your analogies are false. The American public, and most lawmakers DO understand the basics of most of the items you listed (with the possible exception of Obamacare, in which I'm betting a whole lot of people would fail.)

But in the specific case of the debt ceiling, the public doesn't realize that raising it involves paying bills that have already been accrued. Apparently some politicians don't realize it either. This is the MOST basic element of the debt ceiling, and that is what she is talking about. it has nothing to do with her agenda, or mine, or yours.

 

[jon_mx]

Wow, Rachel Maddow nails it in her blog:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/09/27/20720952-default-deniers-demand-to-be-heard

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that debt-ceiling polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics. Regular folks have no idea what the debt ceiling is, what default is, what bond markets are, or what the full faith and credit of the United States means, so polling on the subject tells us nothing.

But what happens when elected federal lawmakers -- the same people who have a responsibility to pay the nation's bills -- are every bit as ignorant as confused constituents?

You could also just as accurately state the followig:

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Obamacare polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Gun control polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Education polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Global Warming polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Government Spending polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

That statement only 'nails it' if you are an elitist pig who does not believe in Democracy except when it fits your own agenda.

But it's not true, and all your analogies are false. The American public, and most lawmakers DO understand the basics of most of the items you listed (with the possible exception of Obamacare, in which I'm betting a whole lot of people would fail.)

But in the specific case of the debt ceiling, the public doesn't realize that raising it involves paying bills that have already been accrued. Apparently some politicians don't realize it either. This is the MOST basic element of the debt ceiling, and that is what she is talking about. it has nothing to do with her agenda, or mine, or yours.

How can you say that. Hell Congress does not even understand how Obamacare is going to work and how it really will impact stuff. You really think people have an understanding of global warming beyond the hype they get from the media? The public is sick of the bottomless pit spending that Congress does and wants something done. Not that either party is going to comply and instead do a bunch of stupid crap that won't accomplish ####. But that is why Congressional approval ratings are sub 20 percent. The public does get it. Congress is the suck.

 

[timschochet]

Wow, Rachel Maddow nails it in her blog:

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/09/27/20720952-default-deniers-demand-to-be-heard

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that debt-ceiling polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics. Regular folks have no idea what the debt ceiling is, what default is, what bond markets are, or what the full faith and credit of the United States means, so polling on the subject tells us nothing.

But what happens when elected federal lawmakers -- the same people who have a responsibility to pay the nation's bills -- are every bit as ignorant as confused constituents?

You could also just as accurately state the followig:

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Obamacare polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Gun control polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Education polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Global Warming polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

A couple of weeks ago, I made the case that Government Spending polls are useless because most Americans simply don't understand the basics.

That statement only 'nails it' if you are an elitist pig who does not believe in Democracy except when it fits your own agenda.

But it's not true, and all your analogies are false. The American public, and most lawmakers DO understand the basics of most of the items you listed (with the possible exception of Obamacare, in which I'm betting a whole lot of people would fail.)

But in the specific case of the debt ceiling, the public doesn't realize that raising it involves paying bills that have already been accrued. Apparently some politicians don't realize it either. This is the MOST basic element of the debt ceiling, and that is what she is talking about. it has nothing to do with her agenda, or mine, or yours.

How can you say that. Hell Congress does not even understand how Obamacare is going to work and how it really will impact stuff. You really think people have an understanding of global warming beyond the hype they get from the media? The public is sick of the bottomless pit spending that Congress does and wants something done. Not that either party is going to comply and instead do a bunch of stupid crap that won't accomplish ####. But that is why Congressional approval ratings are sub 20 percent. The public does get it. Congress is the suck.

You want to be able to call everyone in Congress equally guilty here. You can't acknowledge the truth: that this current crisis is 100% the fault of the House Republicans. It's not 50/50. or even 70/30. If the debt ceiling is not raised and an artificial financial crisis develops, that will be 100% on the GOP.

 

[cstu]

How can you say that. Hell Congress does not even understand how Obamacare is going to work and how it really will impact stuff. You really think people have an understanding of global warming beyond the hype they get from the media? The public is sick of the bottomless pit spending that Congress does and wants something done. Not that either party is going to comply and instead do a bunch of stupid crap that won't accomplish ####. But that is why Congressional approval ratings are sub 20 percent. The public does get it. Congress is the suck.

The public is the one who elected these idiots to Congress and continue to do so election after election. Yeah, they really "get it". The public doesn't have the slightest clue of what it would actually take to fix our debt problems.

 

[cstu]

Everytime tim speaks of populists, I can't help but think of Bill Cosby's Jello Puddin' Pops commercials.

Whatever. What the #### difference does it make what I think? The Republicans are going to shut down the government on Tuesday. I didn't think they'd go through with it. But they're actually going to go through with it. Unreal. All along, despite my #####ing and moaning, I was sort of hoping that I was wrong about the Tea Party, that in the end they'd never pull this ####. But they're going to pull this ####.

Do Republicans not understand how many billions they are costing us right now just so they can grandstand?

 

[TPW]

Everytime tim speaks of populists, I can't help but think of Bill Cosby's Jello Puddin' Pops commercials.

Whatever. What the #### difference does it make what I think? The Republicans are going to shut down the government on Tuesday. I didn't think they'd go through with it. But they're actually going to go through with it. Unreal. All along, despite my #####ing and moaning, I was sort of hoping that I was wrong about the Tea Party, that in the end they'd never pull this ####. But they're going to pull this ####.

Do Republicans not understand how many billions they are costing us right now just so they can grandstand?

I understand that both parties but particularly the Democrats have cost us TRILLIONS in government waste and fraud over the last 50 years. I'd say the present members of Congress have a very long way to go to catch up to the damage that's already been done to the United States whether there's a shutdown or not.

 

[Mister Martie]

Does anyone who isn't a complete idiot or totally uninformed think that failing the raise the debt ceiling would lead to a positive outcome for the country?

 

[TPW]

Does anyone who isn't a complete idiot or totally uninformed think that failing the raise the debt ceiling would lead to a positive outcome for the country?

This "uniformed idiot" thinks it could. The first step in the road to recovery is to admit that you have a problem. Most of the American public have no idea of the virtual Sword of Damocles hanging over their collective heads which are the national debt and our unfunded liabilities. Combine that with an aging populace, a massive new entitlement coming online, and shrinking labor participation rate and you have a guaranteed recipe for disaster.

People need to WAKE UP and if shutting everything down is what it takes to get them to do so, so be it. Services are going to be scaled back in a big way eventually whether folks like it or not.

 

[Slapdash]

Thought this was ineteresting:

[SIZE=10pt]Here is a look at how government shutdowns that lasted more than 10 days affected stocks [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]• 1976 Shutdown: From Sept 30 to Oct. 11 under President Ford. S&P 500 goes from 105.24 to 101.64 (-3.4%).
• 1977 Shutdown: From Sept. 30 to Oct. 13 under President Carter. S&P 500 starts at 96.53 and ends at 93.46 (-3.2%).
• 1978 Shutdown: From Sept. 30 to Oct. 18 under President Carter. S&P starts at 102.54 and ends at 100.49 (-2.0%).
• 1979 Shutdown: From Sept. 30 to Oct. 12 under President Carter. S&P goes from 108.56 to 104.49 (-3.7%).
• 1995-1996 Shutdown: From Dec. 15 to Jan. 6 under President Clinton. S&P goes from 616.92 to 616.71 (-0.3%). [/SIZE]

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Everytime tim speaks of populists, I can't help but think of Bill Cosby's Jello Puddin' Pops commercials.

Whatever. What the #### difference does it make what I think? The Republicans are going to shut down the government on Tuesday. I didn't think they'd go through with it. But they're actually going to go through with it. Unreal. All along, despite my #####ing and moaning, I was sort of hoping that I was wrong about the Tea Party, that in the end they'd never pull this ####. But they're going to pull this ####.

So I take it you are part of the 39% stubborn enough to think Obamacare is good for America?

In January 51% of those polled by CNN/ORC said they favored all or most of the provisions in the new law. Now that figure is down to 39%. Support has dropped in virtually all demographic categories, but it has fallen the farthest among two core Democratic groups - women and Americans who make less than $50,000.

 

[pantagrapher]

Does anyone who isn't a complete idiot or totally uninformed think that failing the raise the debt ceiling would lead to a positive outcome for the country?

This "uniformed idiot" thinks it could. The first step in the road to recovery is to admit that you have a problem. Most of the American public have no idea of the virtual Sword of Damocles hanging over their collective heads which are the national debt and our unfunded liabilities. Combine that with an aging populace, a massive new entitlement coming online, and shrinking labor participation rate and you have a guaranteed recipe for disaster.

People need to WAKE UP and if shutting everything down is what it takes to get them to do so, so be it. Services are going to be scaled back in a big way eventually whether folks like it or not.

That's one. Anyone else?

 

[cstu]

Does anyone who isn't a complete idiot or totally uninformed think that failing the raise the debt ceiling would lead to a positive outcome for the country?

This "uniformed idiot" thinks it could. The first step in the road to recovery is to admit that you have a problem. Most of the American public have no idea of the virtual Sword of Damocles hanging over their collective heads which are the national debt and our unfunded liabilities. Combine that with an aging populace, a massive new entitlement coming online, and shrinking labor participation rate and you have a guaranteed recipe for disaster.

People need to WAKE UP and if shutting everything down is what it takes to get them to do so, so be it. Services are going to be scaled back in a big way eventually whether folks like it or not.

And yet when Gore was telling us we needed to use our budget surplus to pay down the debt you probably voted for Bush.