The Tea Party is back in business! (2 Viewers)

[timschochet]

Perversely the end result of all this could be good -- GOP moderates might end up working with Dems and accepting Obama's entitlement reforms in exchange for new revenues as a result. I wouldn't count on that, but it's possible.

Wait a minute. So not only do you think that Obama and the Democrats don't have to negotiate, you feel like the Republicans should give something in ADDITION to signing off on the CR? Dude.

Doesn't the CR as it currently stands represent a big concession to Republicans?

Absolutely not. As long as the Democrats ignore the budget process, we're going to go through this struggle with every CR.

Woah there. My understanding is that the current CR is not what the Dems wanted- it represents significantly less spending than what they asked for. I've also read that the Democrats did offer a budget, which the Republicans refused to discuss for several months. So what are you going on about?

 

[rolyaTy]

This has been largely about Republican representatives accumulating "de-fund Obamacare" votes for the 2014 elections. They need to be able to run ads in their districts that say "Vote for Jeff Flake, he voted to defund Obamacare 14 times while in office" and other such red meat for the base. They have to be able to say they did everything they could, and that's what we've got now. On October 16 or 17, there will be a CR to fund the government and an approval to raise the debt ceiling with an attached bill that favors some small portion of the Republican agenda unrelated to Obamacare. Tea Partiers will claim victory, but the reality is it won't have accomplished much other than to establish a voting record to run on for re-election for these hard core Republican districts. That, and to make us look, and actually be, dysfunctional as a civilized government. Pathetic leadership all around, really.

This entire facade, from both sides of the aisle, is about getting re-elected. It has nothing at all to do with anything we're discussing here.

It is fun to chat with you guys about it though!

Again, I disagree. Certainly Boehner and many Democrats are looking at everything from a standpoint of election- that's politics, and it's not necessarily a bad thing.

But Obama is obviously not worried about re-election. Obamacare is his legacy. So, for that matter, would be an economic collapse if that happened. And I truly don't believe the Tea Party really gives a crap about re-election either. They believe that this is the time to confront Obama.

Obama wants to maintain his healthcare reform plan, and to cause pain for the republican party to give the democrats an edge in the next election, whether congress, or the next presidential election.

 

[sporthenry]

The people that voted in a Republican majority to Congress aren't going to abandon them because of this.

They were elected to rein in the out of control spending and fight the economic nuclear bomb called Obamacare.

Doing what their constituents voted for them to do.

Now if they cave and give in on the CR negotiations with nothing of consequence to show for it, they might lose some voters.

Not necessarily. As I'm sure you are aware, Republicans lost the popular vote in the House. Assuming people have moved in the last 4 years, it might make for some more purple locations. Not to mention, you are falling prey to their line of thinking that just b/c they were elected, it was a referendum on Obama or Obamacare.

I think most people just want something done and many seem to be adopting the whole, vote any and all of them out which would make for some interesting elections. Sure, the TP will pose issues during primaries but that might just make it that much easier for Democrats to steal some seats as these extremists win primaries.

 

[Mario Kart]

True or False

17 active military members have died since the government shutdown and their loved ones can't receive any death benefits because of the shutdown.

From what I heard, your statement is true. Who to blame though? Obama shut this "program" down to not give federal funds to it but there is a private foundation that is covering it, I heard.

?? When did Obama become a member of the Tea Party?

Don't attack and insult the messenger. And, change the title to reflect the truth in this matter. Reid can easily fix this "crisis."

 

[timschochet]

On the Politico site about Coburn that Jim11 linked, someone wrote this in response:

Conservatives seem to believe that as long as we pay the interest on Federal treasury securities, then the US is not defaulting.

However, this is ultimately wrong. When the US fails to pay for ANY of its obligations (for example, Social Security, Medicare, etc.), that failure to pay our obligation IS a default. And it is damaging to our economy because it signals to the world financial markets and institutional buyers of US securities that the US is unable to pay for all of the obligations it has. The effect of this will be just as bad as a default on the debt.

But Conservatives still seem bent on pushing this delusional dream of theirs that there will be no default. It's reckless and it's insane.

This has been an argument I've been trying to make all day, but whoever wrote this is far more clear and succinct than I have been.

 

[eurotrashman]

True or False

17 active military members have died since the government shutdown and their loved ones can't receive any death benefits because of the shutdown.

From what I heard, your statement is true. Who to blame though? Obama shut this "program" down to not give federal funds to it but there is a private foundation that is covering it, I heard.

?? When did Obama become a member of the Tea Party?

Don't attack and insult the messenger. And, change the title to reflect the truth in this matter. Reid can easily fix this "crisis."

you are a real gem.

 

[Mario Kart]

True or False

17 active military members have died since the government shutdown and their loved ones can't receive any death benefits because of the shutdown.

From what I heard, your statement is true. Who to blame though? Obama shut this "program" down to not give federal funds to it but there is a private foundation that is covering it, I heard.

?? When did Obama become a member of the Tea Party?

Don't attack and insult the messenger. And, change the title to reflect the truth in this matter. Reid can easily fix this "crisis."

you are a real gem.

I try to shine like the brightest gem on the Earth. And, I do a great job doing so.

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

I miss non-insane Republicans. I really do.

They're still around - several posting in this thread even. At some point they have to get fed up with the radicals, don't they?

Nah, they get bullied.

Yup, they get called RINO and other ostracizing terms. Really self-defeating because the implication is unless you buy in to the entire platform, don't bother joining, and that has included the wacko Christian conservatives for the last 15-20 years. So good luck in the party if you're fiscally conservative and socially moderate, or gasp even socially liberal.

Don't act like the same thing doesn't happen across the aisle. Democrats voted lock-step for Obamacare even though they knew it would cost some of them their jobs due to it's massive unpopularity. The only time one of them crosses the aisle is when Reid gives one of them in a swing district permission to throw a meaningless vote the Republicans way.

My point is that Republicans within their own party, for the past 15-20 years, have really closed down their tent to include only those who agree with their entire platform. The hard core conservative base will ostracize those who support only certain conservative policies but not others as "RINO's", or Republicans In Name Only. As in you're not a good enough Republican unless you agree with everything on the platform. So the fiscal conservative, social moderates get pushed into classifying as Independent, and what remains is a more radical Republican party as a result.

I believe the posters were saying they miss the less radical, more moderate Republicans. Heck, John McCain was attacked as not conservative enough in '08 (enter Sarah Palin), and the same with Romney in '12. They had to veer hard right on several positions during primaries that were costly in the general to appease the base. And these were two generally moderate guys who may have had a chance otherwise, rather than losing the general while trying so hard to appeal to the base.

I think it would surprise the Republican party leadership that if they would lighten up and appear to be the voice of reason once in a while, more like they were under Reagan and GHWB, that they might find a lot of folks that voted for Obama that are willing to listen. Paint the D's as a bunch of irresponsible childlike non-leaders with pie in the sky dreams that are unrealistic. Not fit to be a majority party or an executive party. There's a winning strategy there, but the R's are currently missing it, in fact they are the party that appears more childlike in the current scenario.

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

Apologies if I'm talking more politics than policy in here. But these policy knock-down, drag-outs have been pretty tiring already.

 

[Todd Andrews]

I miss non-insane Republicans. I really do.

They're still around - several posting in this thread even. At some point they have to get fed up with the radicals, don't they?

I am fed up with both sides and the people who are only fed up with the other side.

In order for us to believe that you're not one of the crazy ones, you need to put aside whatever you feel about the Dems and Obama and spend your time only attacking the Tea Party until this is over. So long as you indulge in this "I blame both sides" crap, you're either hiding the fact that you admire the Tea Party, or you're giving them cover because you can't tolerate the fact that the liberals might be right in this instance (which could be even worse.)

You forget that you gave them cover through all of 2012. You are Tea Party-lite, Timsquishole.

tim gave cover to the tea party? man you are a KooK. and a dim homo phobe

I voted for Romney, and in his polarized world of us vs. them, it's the same thing.

But I supported Romney in part because I wanted the Republican establishment to stay in charge. I was afraid of this very outcome. I warned at the time that one possible result of a Romney defeat would be a Tea Party takeover of the GOP. Now we're seeing it happen.

No one will ever deny that you are a Good German.

 

[jonessed]

On the Politico site about Coburn that Jim11 linked, someone wrote this in response:

Conservatives seem to believe that as long as we pay the interest on Federal treasury securities, then the US is not defaulting.

However, this is ultimately wrong. When the US fails to pay for ANY of its obligations (for example, Social Security, Medicare, etc.), that failure to pay our obligation IS a default. And it is damaging to our economy because it signals to the world financial markets and institutional buyers of US securities that the US is unable to pay for all of the obligations it has. The effect of this will be just as bad as a default on the debt.

But Conservatives still seem bent on pushing this delusional dream of theirs that there will be no default. It's reckless and it's insane.

This has been an argument I've been trying to make all day, but whoever wrote this is far more clear and succinct than I have been.

We have contractual obligations we aren't paying right now. Are we in default? Using this guy's definition we have defaulted hundreds, if not thousands of times.It would be bad for the economy, but it's not the same as a default. Those obligations can be changed at will. They are debts the government owes to itself. They can legally change the terms any time they want.

 

[timschochet]

On the Politico site about Coburn that Jim11 linked, someone wrote this in response:

Conservatives seem to believe that as long as we pay the interest on Federal treasury securities, then the US is not defaulting.

However, this is ultimately wrong. When the US fails to pay for ANY of its obligations (for example, Social Security, Medicare, etc.), that failure to pay our obligation IS a default. And it is damaging to our economy because it signals to the world financial markets and institutional buyers of US securities that the US is unable to pay for all of the obligations it has. The effect of this will be just as bad as a default on the debt.

But Conservatives still seem bent on pushing this delusional dream of theirs that there will be no default. It's reckless and it's insane.

This has been an argument I've been trying to make all day, but whoever wrote this is far more clear and succinct than I have been.

We have contractual obligations we aren't paying right now. Are we in default? Using this guy's definition we have defaulted hundreds, if not thousands of times.It would be bad for the economy, but it's not the same as a default. Those obligations can be changed at will. They are debts the government owes to itself. They can legally change the terms any time they want.

Wow. I can't believe what I'm reading here. You guys seem to really want this.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

you keep ignoring the FACT the CBO, the GAO and the AUTHOR of Obamacare all say it is a failed policy. THAT IS A FACT.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I miss non-insane Republicans. I really do.

They're still around - several posting in this thread even. At some point they have to get fed up with the radicals, don't they?

Nah, they get bullied.

Yup, they get called RINO and other ostracizing terms. Really self-defeating because the implication is unless you buy in to the entire platform, don't bother joining, and that has included the wacko Christian conservatives for the last 15-20 years. So good luck in the party if you're fiscally conservative and socially moderate, or gasp even socially liberal.

Don't act like the same thing doesn't happen across the aisle. Democrats voted lock-step for Obamacare even though they knew it would cost some of them their jobs due to it's massive unpopularity. The only time one of them crosses the aisle is when Reid gives one of them in a swing district permission to throw a meaningless vote the Republicans way.

Stop with your false equivalency.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

On the Politico site about Coburn that Jim11 linked, someone wrote this in response:

Conservatives seem to believe that as long as we pay the interest on Federal treasury securities, then the US is not defaulting.

However, this is ultimately wrong. When the US fails to pay for ANY of its obligations (for example, Social Security, Medicare, etc.), that failure to pay our obligation IS a default. And it is damaging to our economy because it signals to the world financial markets and institutional buyers of US securities that the US is unable to pay for all of the obligations it has. The effect of this will be just as bad as a default on the debt.

But Conservatives still seem bent on pushing this delusional dream of theirs that there will be no default. It's reckless and it's insane.

This has been an argument I've been trying to make all day, but whoever wrote this is far more clear and succinct than I have been.

We have contractual obligations we aren't paying right now. Are we in default? Using this guy's definition we have defaulted hundreds, if not thousands of times.It would be bad for the economy, but it's not the same as a default. Those obligations can be changed at will. They are debts the government owes to itself. They can legally change the terms any time they want.

Wow. I can't believe what I'm reading here. You guys seem to really want this.

Oh they want it. Go check the conservative forums leading up to it.

They wanted it, insisted upon it and bragged about it.

They just don't want to take the blame for it. And now act/talk in doublespeak.

 

[dparker713]

you keep ignoring the FACT the CBO, the GAO and the AUTHOR of Obamacare all say it is a failed policy. THAT IS A FACT.

Cause its entirely irrelevant to whether the Republicans are acting in a manner that threatens our economy and our democracy.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

So glad to hear the President is willing to negotiate after he gets what he wants.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Head Start programs have been shuttered, small businesses can’t get loans and hundreds of thousands of federal government employees are furloughed.

But the exclusive gyms available only to members of Congress have remained open throughout the shutdown.

A House aide confirmed to ThinkProgress that the House member’s gym is open. The House gym features a swimming pool, basketball courts, paddleball courts, a sauna, a steam room and flat screen TVs. While towel service is unavailable, taxpayers remain on the hook for cleaning and maintenance, which has been performed daily throughout the shutdown. There are also costs associated with the power required to heat the pools and keep the lights on.

According to the aide, the decision to keep the gym open — even while other critical government services were shelved — came directly from Speaker Boehner’s office.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Head Start programs have been shuttered, small businesses can’t get loans and hundreds of thousands of federal government employees are furloughed.

But the exclusive gyms available only to members of Congress have remained open throughout the shutdown.

A House aide confirmed to ThinkProgress that the House member’s gym is open. The House gym features a swimming pool, basketball courts, paddleball courts, a sauna, a steam room and flat screen TVs. While towel service is unavailable, taxpayers remain on the hook for cleaning and maintenance, which has been performed daily throughout the shutdown. There are also costs associated with the power required to heat the pools and keep the lights on.

According to the aide, the decision to keep the gym open — even while other critical government services were shelved — came directly from Speaker Boehner’s office.

Yeah, but there's no towel service. I really don't see how members of Congress are able to cope, and I applaud them for their sacrifice.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Head Start programs have been shuttered, small businesses can’t get loans and hundreds of thousands of federal government employees are furloughed.

But the exclusive gyms available only to members of Congress have remained open throughout the shutdown.

A House aide confirmed to ThinkProgress that the House member’s gym is open. The House gym features a swimming pool, basketball courts, paddleball courts, a sauna, a steam room and flat screen TVs. While towel service is unavailable, taxpayers remain on the hook for cleaning and maintenance, which has been performed daily throughout the shutdown. There are also costs associated with the power required to heat the pools and keep the lights on.

According to the aide, the decision to keep the gym open — even while other critical government services were shelved — came directly from Speaker Boehner’s office.

Yeah, but there's no towel service. I really don't see how members of Congress are able to cope, and I applaud them for their sacrifice.

They have people like JoJo,, tommyboy and wrong_mx manually blow dry 'em.

 

[jon_mx]

Head Start programs have been shuttered, small businesses can’t get loans and hundreds of thousands of federal government employees are furloughed.

But the exclusive gyms available only to members of Congress have remained open throughout the shutdown.

A House aide confirmed to ThinkProgress that the House member’s gym is open. The House gym features a swimming pool, basketball courts, paddleball courts, a sauna, a steam room and flat screen TVs. While towel service is unavailable, taxpayers remain on the hook for cleaning and maintenance, which has been performed daily throughout the shutdown. There are also costs associated with the power required to heat the pools and keep the lights on.

According to the aide, the decision to keep the gym open — even while other critical government services were shelved — came directly from Speaker Boehner’s office.

Yeah, but there's no towel service. I really don't see how members of Congress are able to cope, and I applaud them for their sacrifice.

They have people like JoJo,, tommyboy and wrong_mx manually blow dry 'em.

Besides being a huge disposal container for used feminine hygine products, what the #### purpose do you serve? TIA.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

from CNN...

When asked in the CNN poll whom they are angry at, 63% said Republicans, 58% said Democrats and 53% said Obama. That is a 10-point margin for the president and only a 5-point margin for Democrats, compared with a 23-point margin in November 1995.

Independents said they blamed all three equally (60% GOP, 59% Democrats, 58% Obama). This is so clearly within the margin of error that it is for all practical purposes a tie.

After weeks of the media focusing blame on House Speaker John Boehner, Sen. Ted Cruz and the House Republicans, it is clear the American people are not buying it.

There have been too many days of the president saying, "I will not negotiate."

The country believes him. They can see he's a big part of the reason the government is shut down.

If House Republicans continue to pass targeted, clean continuing resolutions to fund parts of the government and Senate Republicans demand day after day for the right to vote on these popular measures, the margin of blame may begin shifting from virtual parity to a solidly Democratic problem.

If the Republicans repeat every day their willingness to negotiate and Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid repeat every day their refusal to negotiate, this may become catastrophic for the Democrats.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

This has been largely about Republican representatives accumulating "de-fund Obamacare" votes for the 2014 elections. ...

I don't think so. The opportunity to kill ObamaCare is now or never. The right wing radio I hear during lunch time keeps reminding listeners that once a few people benefit from ObamaCare that it will become like Medicare or Social Security and simply impossible to ever get rid of. (i.e. once in place even if just for a few it will be too popular to kill.)

So if you really believe that ObamaCare is a disaster for the nation, now is the last stand. If holding the nation hostage is the only way, then "desperate times call for desperate solutions" and whatever short term harm the nation must feel is worth it in the end.

 

[jonessed]

On the Politico site about Coburn that Jim11 linked, someone wrote this in response:

Conservatives seem to believe that as long as we pay the interest on Federal treasury securities, then the US is not defaulting.

However, this is ultimately wrong. When the US fails to pay for ANY of its obligations (for example, Social Security, Medicare, etc.), that failure to pay our obligation IS a default. And it is damaging to our economy because it signals to the world financial markets and institutional buyers of US securities that the US is unable to pay for all of the obligations it has. The effect of this will be just as bad as a default on the debt.

But Conservatives still seem bent on pushing this delusional dream of theirs that there will be no default. It's reckless and it's insane.

This has been an argument I've been trying to make all day, but whoever wrote this is far more clear and succinct than I have been.

We have contractual obligations we aren't paying right now. Are we in default? Using this guy's definition we have defaulted hundreds, if not thousands of times.It would be bad for the economy, but it's not the same as a default. Those obligations can be changed at will. They are debts the government owes to itself. They can legally change the terms any time they want.

Wow. I can't believe what I'm reading here. You guys seem to really want this.

You always seem to have an alternate reading of everything that can fit comfortably into your agenda.

 

[Slapdash]

Perversely the end result of all this could be good -- GOP moderates might end up working with Dems and accepting Obama's entitlement reforms in exchange for new revenues as a result. I wouldn't count on that, but it's possible.

Wait a minute. So not only do you think that Obama and the Democrats don't have to negotiate, you feel like the Republicans should give something in ADDITION to signing off on the CR? Dude.

Doesn't the CR as it currently stands represent a big concession to Republicans?

Absolutely not. As long as the Democrats ignore the budget process, we're going to go through this struggle with every CR.

Woah there. My understanding is that the current CR is not what the Dems wanted- it represents significantly less spending than what they asked for. I've also read that the Democrats did offer a budget, which the Republicans refused to discuss for several months. So what are you going on about?

:crickets:

 

[Don Quixote]

from CNN...

When asked in the CNN poll whom they are angry at, 63% said Republicans, 58% said Democrats and 53% said Obama. That is a 10-point margin for the president and only a 5-point margin for Democrats, compared with a 23-point margin in November 1995.

Independents said they blamed all three equally (60% GOP, 59% Democrats, 58% Obama). This is so clearly within the margin of error that it is for all practical purposes a tie.

After weeks of the media focusing blame on House Speaker John Boehner, Sen. Ted Cruz and the House Republicans, it is clear the American people are not buying it.

There have been too many days of the president saying, "I will not negotiate."

The country believes him. They can see he's a big part of the reason the government is shut down.

If House Republicans continue to pass targeted, clean continuing resolutions to fund parts of the government and Senate Republicans demand day after day for the right to vote on these popular measures, the margin of blame may begin shifting from virtual parity to a solidly Democratic problem.

If the Republicans repeat every day their willingness to negotiate and Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid repeat every day their refusal to negotiate, this may become catastrophic for the Democrats.

"From CNN" and no link. Nice way to hide that it was written by Newt Gingrich.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

So you were talking about politician positions I think it's pretty naive to think that their careers are not one of the main considerations. I don't believe that if you locked them all in a room under the guise of anonymity that this would be so difficult to figure out. I can say that for just about any issue they run into but they have jobs to keep, lobbies to answer to and donors to appease. It's only because of their concern for their jobs and their "promises" to lobbies, companies etc that things get mucked up. I have no problem with compromised solutions if they are reasonable and effective. Compromise isn't the issue to me. The process isn't the issue to me. It's the motive of the people using the process, what's driving them and what's influencing their decisions. Heck, I'm not even convinced some of these yahoos know what the process is or actually works,but I am confident they know who their supporters are and who's giving them money.

The shutdown of government, the using of the default limit as leverage to exercise power is not originating with politicians. Sure politicians care about keeping their jobs, but the goals of this shutdown are coming from the demands of constituents. So, yes maybe GOP politicians should represent their constituents best interest and ignore their nonsense and do their job, but other than that the blame here belongs at the grass roots and not in DC. So "NO" this is not about understanding the positions of politicians.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

CBS News has found 200 House Democrats and 14 House Republicans would support funding the government -- two more votes would be needed for it to pass.

However, Speaker Boehner is refusing to hold a vote. He says he is waiting for the president to negotiate, but has privately told House Republicans he is done negotiating.

~ CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante reports.

:IBTL:

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

from CNN...

When asked in the CNN poll whom they are angry at, 63% said Republicans, 58% said Democrats and 53% said Obama. That is a 10-point margin for the president and only a 5-point margin for Democrats, compared with a 23-point margin in November 1995.

Independents said they blamed all three equally (60% GOP, 59% Democrats, 58% Obama). This is so clearly within the margin of error that it is for all practical purposes a tie.

After weeks of the media focusing blame on House Speaker John Boehner, Sen. Ted Cruz and the House Republicans, it is clear the American people are not buying it.

There have been too many days of the president saying, "I will not negotiate."

The country believes him. They can see he's a big part of the reason the government is shut down.

If House Republicans continue to pass targeted, clean continuing resolutions to fund parts of the government and Senate Republicans demand day after day for the right to vote on these popular measures, the margin of blame may begin shifting from virtual parity to a solidly Democratic problem.

If the Republicans repeat every day their willingness to negotiate and Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid repeat every day their refusal to negotiate, this may become catastrophic for the Democrats.

"From CNN" and no link. Nice way to hide that it was written by Newt Gingrich.

He gave the poll?

When asked in the CNN poll whom they are angry at

But wait the Independents are blaming Dems and Repubs equally, did Newt force them to poll that way?

SKY IS FALLING, SKY IS FALLING, SKY IS FALLING --> BLAME REPUBLICANS

NOPE

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Democrats and republicans tend to have different perspectives on the relative merits of this relatively recent event. Removing the states ability to regulate every plan offered within its borders will result in the same things happening. Whether that is a good thing or not (as whole) is where the parties disagree.
Oh, and it is allowed in ObamaCare in the sense that states are free to for interstate compacts. Not quite the same.

Good read ... thanks, Bottomfeeder.

You are welcome. Hopefully the analogy between credit cards and insurance worked well enough for you to understand why some want it and why some don't.

What I found interesting is that as the nation's economy was collapsing based on deregulating credit one major party was proposing to repeat the success with health care. So now you know (if you didn't already) where I stand.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

But wait the Independents are blaming Dems and Repubs equally, did Newt force them to poll that way?SKY IS FALLING, SKY IS FALLING, SKY IS FALLING --> BLAME REPUBLICANS

NOPE

Carry on, governor.

 

[humpback]

On the Politico site about Coburn that Jim11 linked, someone wrote this in response:

Conservatives seem to believe that as long as we pay the interest on Federal treasury securities, then the US is not defaulting.

However, this is ultimately wrong. When the US fails to pay for ANY of its obligations (for example, Social Security, Medicare, etc.), that failure to pay our obligation IS a default. And it is damaging to our economy because it signals to the world financial markets and institutional buyers of US securities that the US is unable to pay for all of the obligations it has. The effect of this will be just as bad as a default on the debt.

But Conservatives still seem bent on pushing this delusional dream of theirs that there will be no default. It's reckless and it's insane.

This has been an argument I've been trying to make all day, but whoever wrote this is far more clear and succinct than I have been.

We have contractual obligations we aren't paying right now. Are we in default? Using this guy's definition we have defaulted hundreds, if not thousands of times.It would be bad for the economy, but it's not the same as a default. Those obligations can be changed at will. They are debts the government owes to itself. They can legally change the terms any time they want.

Wow. I can't believe what I'm reading here. You guys seem to really want this.

You always seem to have an alternate reading of everything that can fit comfortably into your agenda.

This isn't a political call. If the federal government defaults on any of its obligations, it will have the same effect on Wall Street as it just defaulting on its bond obligations.

Again, I'm not rooting for it, but this is bs.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

I miss non-insane Republicans. I really do.

They're still around - several posting in this thread even. At some point they have to get fed up with the radicals, don't they?

Nah, they get bullied.

Yup, they get called RINO and other ostracizing terms. Really self-defeating because the implication is unless you buy in to the entire platform, don't bother joining, and that has included the wacko Christian conservatives for the last 15-20 years. So good luck in the party if you're fiscally conservative and socially moderate, or gasp even socially liberal.

Don't act like the same thing doesn't happen across the aisle. Democrats voted lock-step for Obamacare even though they knew it would cost some of them their jobs due to it's massive unpopularity. The only time one of them crosses the aisle is when Reid gives one of them in a swing district permission to throw a meaningless vote the Republicans way.

 

[timschochet]

JoJo's polling, from Newt's article, is dated anyhow. Yesterday evening I linked a more recent poll- 70% of the public, including the majority of independents, blame this mess on Republicans. The "equal blame" argument isn't flying with the public.

 

[SmoovySmoov]

This has been largely about Republican representatives accumulating "de-fund Obamacare" votes for the 2014 elections. ...

I don't think so. The opportunity to kill ObamaCare is now or never. The right wing radio I hear during lunch time keeps reminding listeners that once a few people benefit from ObamaCare that it will become like Medicare or Social Security and simply impossible to ever get rid of. (i.e. once in place even if just for a few it will be too popular to kill.)

So if you really believe that ObamaCare is a disaster for the nation, now is the last stand. If holding the nation hostage is the only way, then "desperate times call for desperate solutions" and whatever short term harm the nation must feel is worth it in the end.

You ever see the movie "Idiocracy"?

 

[Don Quixote]

from CNN...

When asked in the CNN poll whom they are angry at, 63% said Republicans, 58% said Democrats and 53% said Obama. That is a 10-point margin for the president and only a 5-point margin for Democrats, compared with a 23-point margin in November 1995.

Independents said they blamed all three equally (60% GOP, 59% Democrats, 58% Obama). This is so clearly within the margin of error that it is for all practical purposes a tie.

After weeks of the media focusing blame on House Speaker John Boehner, Sen. Ted Cruz and the House Republicans, it is clear the American people are not buying it.

There have been too many days of the president saying, "I will not negotiate."

The country believes him. They can see he's a big part of the reason the government is shut down.

If House Republicans continue to pass targeted, clean continuing resolutions to fund parts of the government and Senate Republicans demand day after day for the right to vote on these popular measures, the margin of blame may begin shifting from virtual parity to a solidly Democratic problem.

If the Republicans repeat every day their willingness to negotiate and Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid repeat every day their refusal to negotiate, this may become catastrophic for the Democrats.

"From CNN" and no link. Nice way to hide that it was written by Newt Gingrich.

He gave the poll?

When asked in the CNN poll whom they are angry at

But wait the Independents are blaming Dems and Repubs equally, did Newt force them to poll that way?

SKY IS FALLING, SKY IS FALLING, SKY IS FALLING --> BLAME REPUBLICANS

NOPE

I was laughing at the analysis. Overall, 63% are "angry" at Republicans, 58% at Democrats, and 53% at Obama. Newt then somehow spins this as "catastrophic for the Democrats." If it's "catastrophic" for Democrats, I'm not sure the adjective to apply to Republicans -- apocalyptic?

ETA: And Republicans are not winning anything if they are just splitting independents equally: Party ID

 

[TheIronSheik]

This thread really makes me wonder if monarchy wasnt so bad after all.

Depends on which monarch you end up with. Our brand of Democracy pretty much guarantees mediocrity in government at this point. With Monarchy you could get horrible, could get great, could also get mediocre - put your money down and ride the snake. Anyway, not to worry, we're either heading into straight Plutocracy (Monarchy's tricky cousin) or a patch of anarchy in the near future.

Maybe a monarchy we could vote for then.

 

[jon_mx]

As long as the public takes sides in this, nothing will get done. As long as there are enough Tim-types who blame the GOP 100% for this, Obama and the Dems will not budge and we will be at a stand still. I will continue holding my 'extremist' position of holding all parties responsible for this mess. These children need to get together in the same room and find some common ground somewhere to get this thing done. There is nothing hard about it. There are a million possible solutions. Find one and stop playing the blame game.

 

[msommer]

This thread really makes me wonder if monarchy wasnt so bad after all.

Depends on which monarch you end up with. Our brand of Democracy pretty much guarantees mediocrity in government at this point. With Monarchy you could get horrible, could get great, could also get mediocre - put your money down and ride the snake. Anyway, not to worry, we're either heading into straight Plutocracy (Monarchy's tricky cousin) or a patch of anarchy in the near future.

Maybe a monarchy we could vote for then.

We could call that a republic! No that's already been taken. Caliphate? Nope, Feudal because the count votes?

I'm running out of ideas here...

 

[Sammy3469]

As long as the public takes sides in this, nothing will get done. As long as there are enough Tim-types who blame the GOP 100% for this, Obama and the Dems will not budge and we will be at a stand still. I will continue holding my 'extremist' position of holding all parties responsible for this mess. These children need to get together in the same room and find some common ground somewhere to get this thing done. There is nothing hard about it. There are a million possible solutions. Find one and stop playing the blame game.

OK

 

[timschochet]

As long as the public takes sides in this, nothing will get done. As long as there are enough Tim-types who blame the GOP 100% for this, Obama and the Dems will not budge and we will be at a stand still. I will continue holding my 'extremist' position of holding all parties responsible for this mess. These children need to get together in the same room and find some common ground somewhere to get this thing done. There is nothing hard about it. There are a million possible solutions. Find one and stop playing the blame game.

So you think that I should ignore the Tea Party's culpability for this mess, and that instead I should blame both sides equally, because if enough people do, that will pressure Obama and the Dems to budge?

The problem with this, beyond the fact that I DO hold the Republicans responsible for this, is that I don't want Obama to budge. President Obama has made the argument that if he gives in to the Republican demands, it will create a situation in which the shutdown and debt ceiling are always used in the future to extract partisan demands by both sides. He argues that the lesson of 2011 is that this sort of crisis should never happen again. After some consideration, I agree with this stance.

The Republicans need to agree to Obama's latest offer to fund the government and raise the debt ceiling for a short period of time during which they can THEN negotiate. That's the only way this crisis gets solved, IMO.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. ...Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that 'the buck stops here'. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and Grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."
- Senator Obama, March 2006

That's SENATOR Obama. His stance has changed dramatically now that HE is the leader.

 

[Statorama]

You guys are taking this thing WAY too seriously

 

[timschochet]

Thomas Friedman gets it exactly right:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/09/opinion/friedman-us-fringe-festival.html?_r=0

The more pragmatic Republicans, who know that this is a disaster for their party but won’t confront Cruz & Co., have settled on this bogus line: “Well, sure, maybe Cruz and the Tea Party went too far, but it’s still President Obama’s fault. He’s president. He should negotiate with them. He needs to lead.”

President Obama is leading. He is protecting the very rules that are the foundation of any healthy democracy. He is leading by not giving in to this blackmail, because if he did he would undermine the principle of majority rule that is the bedrock of our democracy. That system guarantees the minority the right to be heard and to run for office and become the majority, but it also ensures that once voters have spoken, and their representatives have voted — and, if legally challenged, the Supreme Court has also ruled in their favor — the majority decision holds sway. A minority of a minority, which has lost every democratic means to secure its agenda, has no right to now threaten to tank our economy if its demands are not met. If we do not preserve this system, nothing will ever be settled again in American politics. There would be nothing to prevent a future Democratic Congress from using the exact same blackmail to try to overturn a law enacted by their Republican rivals.

The president has said that he would give the G.O.P. an agenda for negotiations that could start when the government is funded and the debt ceiling lifted. He’s ready to consider trading the medical-device tax in Obamacare for another equivalent source of revenue or having a talk about closing tax loopholes and reforming entitlements — to both lower the deficit and raise revenue to invest in infrastructure or early childhood education. What Obama will not do, and must not do, is pay an entry fee to that negotiation — say giving up the medical-device tax — just to help Boehner down from the tree. Cruz & Co. would claim victory.

 

[jon_mx]

As long as the public takes sides in this, nothing will get done. As long as there are enough Tim-types who blame the GOP 100% for this, Obama and the Dems will not budge and we will be at a stand still. I will continue holding my 'extremist' position of holding all parties responsible for this mess. These children need to get together in the same room and find some common ground somewhere to get this thing done. There is nothing hard about it. There are a million possible solutions. Find one and stop playing the blame game.

So you think that I should ignore the Tea Party's culpability for this mess, and that instead I should blame both sides equally, because if enough people do, that will pressure Obama and the Dems to budge?

The problem with this, beyond the fact that I DO hold the Republicans responsible for this, is that I don't want Obama to budge. President Obama has made the argument that if he gives in to the Republican demands, it will create a situation in which the shutdown and debt ceiling are always used in the future to extract partisan demands by both sides. He argues that the lesson of 2011 is that this sort of crisis should never happen again. After some consideration, I agree with this stance.

The Republicans need to agree to Obama's latest offer to fund the government and raise the debt ceiling for a short period of time during which they can THEN negotiate. That's the only way this crisis gets solved, IMO.

That is not how any crisis is ever resolved. Each side has to give something, no matter how small. See Cuban Missile Crisis. Either my way or the highway is a position of failure. All people have pride and Obama is being a jackass for not throwing out some bread crum so that everyone can save face. Complete lack of leadership whether you are willing to admit it or not.

 

[timschochet]

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. ...Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that 'the buck stops here'. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and Grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

- Senator Obama, March 2006

That's SENATOR Obama. His stance has changed dramatically now that HE is the leader.

Damn! I've never seen that quote before!

 

[The Commish]

Again, I disagree. Certainly Boehner and many Democrats are looking at everything from a standpoint of election- that's politics, and it's not necessarily a bad thing.

I knew you'd be able to come through. I knew that at some point you'd find a way. Good job!!!

This pretty much sums up why we are in this position as a country. If you can't see how looking at things from a political standpoint isn't absolutely killing this country, you're a lost cause and just dust in the wind....holy hell.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Again, I disagree. Certainly Boehner and many Democrats are looking at everything from a standpoint of election- that's politics, and it's not necessarily a bad thing.

I knew you'd be able to come through. I knew that at some point you'd find a way. Good job!!!

This pretty much sums up why we are in this position as a country. If you can't see how looking at things from a political standpoint isn't absolutely killing this country, you're a lost cause and just dust in the wind....holy hell.

 

[timschochet]

Again, I disagree. Certainly Boehner and many Democrats are looking at everything from a standpoint of election- that's politics, and it's not necessarily a bad thing.

I knew you'd be able to come through. I knew that at some point you'd find a way. Good job!!!

This pretty much sums up why we are in this position as a country. If you can't see how looking at things from a political standpoint isn't absolutely killing this country, you're a lost cause and just dust in the wind....holy hell.

The phrase "not necessarily" is not exactly an endorsement.

Overall though, I have to take issue with your blanket statement that it's "absolutely killing this country." I certainly have no love for the "political standpoint." But I also realize that the Tea Party, whom I believe are the ones to blame for this current crisis, are NOT political. They are true believers.

 

[jon_mx]

Again, I disagree. Certainly Boehner and many Democrats are looking at everything from a standpoint of election- that's politics, and it's not necessarily a bad thing.

I knew you'd be able to come through. I knew that at some point you'd find a way. Good job!!!

This pretty much sums up why we are in this position as a country. If you can't see how looking at things from a political standpoint isn't absolutely killing this country, you're a lost cause and just dust in the wind....holy hell.

And you are so ignorant to not see that is exactly what I have been saying from day one of this thread.