February 28, 2011

More Would Blame Democrats For Government (Not a) Shut-Down Than Republicans, 29%-23%
— Ace

With the rest, I guess, saying they don't know or they blame both.

When the GOP breaks faith with the base in order to gain a political advantage by appearing moderate, the only argument they can offer the base is that "we had to; politics required it."

As you know, I'm not exactly immune to that line of reasoning -- I do believe in some cases discretion is the better part of valor.

But this is a fact-based inquiry; it depends on the actual facts. "We had to do it for political reasons" is not and never can be an all-purpose get out of jail free card for selling out key ideological principles. In some cases, they may be unachievable, and therefore it may be (to people who think like me) acceptable to take the half loaf of bread instead of losing the whole loaf.

But in other cases -- and this seems to be one of those "other cases" -- politics is in fact on the ideological warriors' side, so the "politics made me do it" excuse doesn't fly.

Just putting that out there: That I believe (and I think a lot of conservatives believe) that there is not a particularly strong political reason to cave on spending just to avoid a shut-down, and if the GOP caves in the face of this not-threatening threat, it will be perceived as not being forced on the GOP but rather what they always secretly wished to do anyway.

Confirmatory Poll: Rasumussen has a reinforcing finding -- 58% of the public would prefer a "partial" shut-down (which is what a shut-down is) rather than see Congress spend at last year's levels.

The GOP has a relatively strong hand here, or at least a historically strong one. The public is rarely in the genuine (as opposed to gestural) mood for real (as opposed to hypothetical) spending cuts.

The GOP cannot act as if it's business as usual because the business here is facing a rare opportunity for windfall.

Again, I know I'm personally not going to be on board for yet another GOP cave.

If they cave again, what good are they? What is the point?

Posted by: Ace at 08:07 AM | Comments (156)
Post contains 387 words, total size 2 kb.

1 What do the Republicans gain by not shutting down the govt?

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 08:09 AM (uFokq)

2 you play poker, Ace?

like going  ' all in' ??

Posted by: gSantaRosaStan, whose Rip is no longer Torn at February 28, 2011 08:09 AM (UqKQV)

3 313 Road to Ruin patriotic protest ...the idea is that we are on a road to ruin and we, the people, choose to STOP

Sunday, March 3, 3-4 pm central time

Posted by: elspeth at February 28, 2011 08:10 AM (0AkWH)

4 In other words, they seem to admit there is no net gain by no shutdown; they merely avoid a net loss. Which isn't even the case according to the cited poll.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 08:10 AM (uFokq)

5 There are 535 people who got us into this mess.  They wanted it this way; they got it this way.


Posted by: elspeth at February 28, 2011 08:11 AM (0AkWH)

6

But after a few weeks of MBM propaganda, I'm sure a majority would come around to believin' it was the Republicans.

Just sayin'.

We're a country with a lot of soft -headed squishes.

And we're boned, too.

Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes.... at February 28, 2011 08:11 AM (usS2T)

7 O/T: Emanuel Cleaver on Meet The Press: Yes, I Condemn Protesters Who Compare Scott Walker to Hitler, Now Let Me Compare Him to Qaddafi Instead

Posted by: chemjeff at February 28, 2011 08:12 AM (czcue)

8

They will cave most of them are spineless scumbags anyway sad to say. If they hold I'll be just stunned.

What would be nice to see, if they did hold the line, would be for them to push up the cuts a billion dollars a day for each day the Dems wouldn't sign. Never happen though.

Posted by: southdakotaboy at February 28, 2011 08:12 AM (TC4J/)

9 The Republican leadership is afraid to lead. That's it in a nutshell. They were afraid to lead in the minority, and now they're afraid to lead in the majority.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 08:12 AM (uFokq)

10 What do the Republicans gain by not shutting down the govt? Posted by: Soothsayer
--------
They lose independents and some moderates.  2012 is lost without them, despite what the purity trolls say.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 28, 2011 08:12 AM (f9c2L)

11 Scared and witless is no way to govern, GOP. Your jobs are: cut spending stop liberal judges from being appointed rein in the regime's corruption Failure to do so will lead to primary challenges

Posted by: joeindc44 at February 28, 2011 08:13 AM (QxSug)

12 @10 What do the Republicans gain by not shutting down the govt? Posted by: Soothsayer
--------
They lose independents and some moderates.  2012


___

Not based on what the Rasmussen poll says.  And that poll is of likely voters.

Handled correctly, the Rs do not have to lose any support over this. 

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 08:14 AM (pW2o8)

13 Maybe the GOP thinks it will get the same backlash it did when a shutdown happened under Clinton.

Posted by: Penfold at February 28, 2011 08:14 AM (1PeEC)

14 I don't trust Rasmussen after their terrible showing last election cycle.  They will have to work very hard for me to look at their numbers again with  any trust.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 28, 2011 08:14 AM (f9c2L)

15 Again, the Republicans (Boehner, etc.) didn't earn their victory for control of the House. They won by default. We have the same group (along with the same attitudes, ideals, and convictions) now as we did in 2006. Nothing has changed.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 08:15 AM (uFokq)

16 So, more people believe that Obama is an illegal alien than have a strong opinion Republicans being to blame or Democrats being to blame. We. are. so. screwed. Given that fact, I'm now in favor of an ammendment that only allows people who own ferrets to vote. -

Posted by: BumperStickerist at February 28, 2011 08:15 AM (h6mPj)

17 I don't believe the Pubbies have lost anything here. They have forced adult behavior in the Senate and it seems in the WH. I personally don't know who the adult in the WH is, but someone has done some polling and knows Dems loose big if the shutdown occurs. Lets see what comes out of it. We can always force a shutdown when needed.

Posted by: Inspector Cleuseau at February 28, 2011 08:15 AM (Q5+Og)

18

As that immortal philosopher and understander of human behavior Fonzie once told Richie, threats to punch someone's lights out work if, and only if, you have at least once in your living history, punched someone's lights out.

Let's skip right to the triple dog dare and throw the master money switch.

Posted by: Count de Monet at February 28, 2011 08:16 AM (XBM1t)

19 13 Maybe the GOP thinks it will get the same backlash it did when a shutdown happened under Clinton.

The ones thinking that are the same goddamn idiots who think that the press may give them a fair shake if they roll over and take it from the Dems.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at February 28, 2011 08:16 AM (bxvFd)

20 14 I don't trust Rasmussen after their terrible showing last election cycle.

But the numbers are overwhelming.  Even a 10 point swing wouldn't put the Rs in the loser category. 

And, anyway, it's the right thing to do. 

If a guy like Christie can win over blue New Jersey, there's no reason that the GOP can't make an effective case to the American people that a shutdown is necessary.

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 08:16 AM (pW2o8)

21 Purity trolls? Can you fucking shitbags go one fucking thread without bitching about purity Republicans and pre-emptively screaming RINO!? Grow the fuck up.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 08:17 AM (uFokq)

22 Republicans are stupid. This isn't an "issue," this is a matter of core beliefs of less spending and smaller government. Republicans are stupid. If you believe what you profess about cutting spending and smaller government, the best time to cut is always RIGHT NOW. Republicans are stupid. They should be taking the offense, but they won't. "Shut down government? Good! Watch all the 'non-essential' workers get furloughed and ask yourself why your government employs millions of nonessential employees."

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at February 28, 2011 08:17 AM (ssbB6)

23 What? Theyre not blaming bush, palin, or the jooooos? WOW

Posted by: Ncj the non-terrorist cabbie at February 28, 2011 08:18 AM (X7seZ)

24 anyway... Very rarely does one lose support when one shows leadership for the right side of an issue. Time to make hard decisions. People will understand and appreciate it.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 08:18 AM (uFokq)

25 I depise Obama as much as anyone in this country, but a government shutdown doesn't matter either way. The government still operates...SS checks out, military is funded, etc... The republicans only control the House afor now and I think they are doing best they can do for the situation. Have faith the total change will not happen over nite, but it will happen. It took Reagan several years to fix carter's (Obama #1) mess...

Posted by: Jimmy Genttemann at February 28, 2011 08:19 AM (By4wu)

26 The GOP had a strong hand just after Nov. 2010 and they folded two weeks early on the weak tax deal. Past experience advises against anticipating any greater resolve here. However, the mini-CR every week is a sign of creativity, and nothing less will change the conventional outcomes of DC politics. The Demotards pushed the limits of Congress passing Obastardcare; the GOP cannot afford to push less aginst their limits.

Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2011 08:20 AM (AZGON)

27 The first poll is just saying that 48% will blame whoever the media tells them to blame.  Also, use "partial government shutdown".  I like it a lot.  It's less scary.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 28, 2011 08:21 AM (T0NGe)

28

@3: "Sunday, March 3, 3-4 pm central time"

What year? March 3 is a Thursday.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at February 28, 2011 08:21 AM (xy9wk)

29 If the government shuts down, who will investigate steroid use in baseball?

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at February 28, 2011 08:21 AM (+lsX1)

30 Can you fucking shitbags go one fucking thread without bitching about purity Republicans and pre-emptively screaming RINO!? Your papers, please.

Posted by: Purity Reichsminister Jeff at February 28, 2011 08:22 AM (ssbB6)

31 If they cave again, what good are they? What is the point?

The t-shirts?

Posted by: Methos at February 28, 2011 08:22 AM (Ew1k4)

32 A CNN poll from mid-December indicated that most would take a short shutdown in stride.  I don't see any evidence that the Dems have strengthened their position since then.  Look at the underwhelming crowds across the nation this weekend in support of the WI union protesters.  And, although it was annoying, the Rs can say they tried to compromise by not voting for the additional $22B in cuts. 

Just. Do. It.

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 08:23 AM (pW2o8)

33 Jeff - If "shutting down the government" meant only non-essential worker got furloughed, that would work in our favor.  But we have a Dem president and a Dem Senate.  They will make it hard on some portion of the population (SS checks, etc) and blame Boehner and the GOP.  It's like twisting another kid's arm on the playground.. they'll yell and scream an d make a big deal of it.

I don't trust a poll to tell me how this will go with the public, because polls cannot factor in the spin.  Look at the positive spin the fucking unions are getting in Wisconsin nationwide, for example.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at February 28, 2011 08:23 AM (f9c2L)

34 yes, Jimmy, the government don't shut down -- but the MFM, including FOKS news ( thanks, KQueef ) will pull its skirts up over its head and scream

SHUTDOWN !!!!!!!!!!!111111111!!!!!!!!

Risky business, so the Rs better organize this better than 95.  I know that Now is very different from 1995 but the Rs better be willing and able to make their case

Posted by: gSantaRosaStan, whose Rip is no longer Torn at February 28, 2011 08:24 AM (UqKQV)

35 threats to punch someone's lights out work if, and only if, you have at least once in your living history, punched someone's lights out. Don't say things like that. It makes John Boehner weepy and sad.

Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2011 08:24 AM (AZGON)

36 And Rassmusen reports that 67% of the people disapprove of the Fleebaggers. If there is a time to be firm it is now.

Posted by: Quilly Mammoth at February 28, 2011 08:24 AM (4yjiA)

37 He Who Hates Lawyers is right. Our biggest problem, by far, is our communication with the people. The media controls the narrative because we have no one, save Christie, who can articulate why we need to restructure the budget.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 08:24 AM (uFokq)

38 I don't trust a poll to tell me how this will go with the public, because polls cannot factor in the spin.  Look at the positive spin the fucking unions are getting in Wisconsin nationwide, for example.

They're getting spin and it's not helping them much, IMHO. 

The various pollsters are having to get additional data samples and/or stack the questions in order to get results saying that the unions either have equal support compared to Walker or slightly less. 

If the propaganda mill was actually effective, Walker would be getting crushed in the polls.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at February 28, 2011 08:25 AM (bxvFd)

39 20 14 [...] If a guy like Christie can win over blue New Jersey, there's no reason that the GOP can't make an effective case to the American people that a shutdown is necessary.

Though that would mean having to do a 180 on what they've constantly been saying the last few weeks. The line is that Obama and the Dems have been threatening a shutdown through their reckless spending. So they've been advertising averting the shutdown unless Obama forced their hand.

I'm also rather curious because Friday Boehner's tactics were considered bad, good again on Saturday yet bad again today. Are they good or bad? They can't be both.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 28, 2011 08:25 AM (q8u+l)

40 This is a big financial mess. You can put it it off for a bit, but you will have to deal with it at some point. But if you put it off, the mess will continue to grow and the amount of pain involved in the clean-up will increase. And, there will be blood. Oh yes, there will be blood.

Posted by: Daniel Plainview at February 28, 2011 08:26 AM (4Kl5M)

41

@31: "If they cave again, what good are they? What is the point?

The t-shirts?"

----------------------

Better-managed socialism!!!!! That's the payoff.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at February 28, 2011 08:26 AM (xy9wk)

42 I don't trust a poll to tell me how this will go with the public, because polls cannot factor in the spin.  Look at the positive spin the fucking unions are getting in Wisconsin nationwide, for example.

Yes, and with all that spin they yielded 500-1,000 protesters in WASHING-FUCKINGTON, D.C. 

It's fine to say not to trust polls.  That's a valid strategy.  But then you need to not be scared by the public opinion bogeyman.  In other words, they need to do what is right and use every tool in their toolbox to sell that it's right.  That means a moratorium on people picking on Christie, for example.  He's an effective spokesperson, so we need to use him to help justify this.  If Daniels works for some people, use him, too.  Let's work as a team and get everyone on the same message. 

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 08:27 AM (pW2o8)

43 Indeed. The Democrats want full-on socialism. The Republicans are offering 'Just the Tip' socialism.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 08:27 AM (uFokq)

44 I think that this says that the left has lost control of the narrative. If normal people are clued into what's going on, then it's time to act. Cut spending.

Posted by: joeindc44 at February 28, 2011 08:28 AM (QxSug)

45 So let's assume the worst case scenario of Obama making a government shut down as painful as possible.  Would it still be running at a deficit and how instructive would that realization be?

Posted by: Methos at February 28, 2011 08:28 AM (Ew1k4)

46 "The t-shirts?" Together We Connive

Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2011 08:28 AM (AZGON)

47 Pussies.

Posted by: Mr Pink at February 28, 2011 08:29 AM (SwsAI)

48

24
anyway...

Very rarely does one lose support when one shows leadership for the right side of an issue.

Time to make hard decisions. People will understand and appreciate it.

I totally agree!  Standing up for something doesn't seem to have hurt Chris Christie too much in the realm of public opinion.   Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

Posted by: havedash at February 28, 2011 08:29 AM (sFD5n)

49 I find your attitude somewhat less than enthusiastic, Citizen Chi-Town Jerry.

Posted by: Purity Reichsminister Jeff at February 28, 2011 08:29 AM (ssbB6)

50 Shut it down

Posted by: nevergiveup at February 28, 2011 08:29 AM (0GFWk)

51 I think that if the Republicans try to sell Socialism Lite to the TEA party there is likely to be no sale.

Posted by: maddogg at February 28, 2011 08:29 AM (OlN4e)

52

@38: "The media controls the narrative because we have no one, save Christie, who can articulate why we need to restructure the budget."

The GOP upper echelons can't articulate it (or any other aspect of common sense conservatism), because they don't really believe it.  They're statist looters at heart, too.  They just believe in killing the goose slower than the Dems would.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at February 28, 2011 08:29 AM (xy9wk)

53

The public is rarely in the genuine (as opposed to gestural) mood for real (as opposed to hypothetical) spending cuts.

Except they don't want cuts in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment, education, funding of the environment, the defense budget, etc.

The public are secret communists - they only support cuts if someone else is affected.

Not them.

Posted by: The Q at February 28, 2011 08:29 AM (MYuEC)

54 Purity of Essence.  We must protect our Precious Bodily Fluids from the RINOs.

Posted by: General Ripper at February 28, 2011 08:30 AM (4yjiA)

55 Handled correctly, the Rs do not have to lose any support over this. 

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 01:14 PM (pW2o

Handled correctly the Republicans can gain support! A principled stand against government waste and overspending, accompanied by a unified message from all of them that the fiscal policies of the past, including that of Republicans, has to change.

And it won't happen.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at February 28, 2011 08:30 AM (LH6ir)

56 House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) told a convention of religious broadcasters in Nashville on Sunday evening that a federal government shutdown was not appropriate and not what the electorate wanted.

His remarks were the latest sign that congressional leaders were backing away from the brink of a shutdown.

"Americans want the government to stay open, and they want it to spend less money," Boehner said. "We don't need to shut down the government to accomplish that. We just need to do what the American people are asking of us."

He cited "the moral responsibility" to reduce the federal deficit and cut government largesse while keeping the government open, but he said Congress also had a responsibility to address Social Security and Medicare spending.




Yeah, we're going to take the Dems to the mat, we are.....

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 28, 2011 08:31 AM (DsqGb)

57 Shut it down. The folks off of work can stay here and enjoy our in-room coffee makers and the heated pool. But we are worried about when you guys are going to pay for your rooms.

Posted by: A hotel somewhere in Illinois at February 28, 2011 08:31 AM (AZGON)

58 How about we do what we know is right and let the chips fall where they may?

Just be prepared to defend your position.

Posted by: nickless at February 28, 2011 08:32 AM (MMC8r)

59 Watching the Dems and the Reps is like watching professional poker players vs. amateur poker players

Amateurs rarely know when and how to bluff--or when to go 'all in'

The Dems have gone All In in Madison and whatever the frakkin capital of Indiana is.  Walker seems to have snap-called;  Daniels is waffling

Life sucks and politics is treacherous but poker is interesting

Posted by: SantaRosaStan, whose Rip is no longer Torn at February 28, 2011 08:32 AM (UqKQV)

60 Though that would mean having to do a 180 on what they've constantly been saying the last few weeks.

I don't know how regular people would see it, but to me it's no big deal.  The Rs can say their hand was forced and talk about the lesser of two evils. 

I think most folks accept that things change and that politicians/elected officials adjust to that change.  But maybe I'm wrong about that. 

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 08:32 AM (pW2o8)

61 If there is a government "shut down" the MFM will swing into action like it did in the 90s and blame the Republicans and do all of the usually stories of despair and hardship created by those EVIL monster Republicans

Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 28, 2011 08:32 AM (1Jaio)

62 the guy on the radio up here made a great point today. He said no Republican can talk as well as Gov Christie. If you listen to McConnell or Boehner on Meet the Press, they recite their talking points and then if asked questions they get befuddled and stammer and then again recite their talking points.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 08:32 AM (uFokq)

63

@53: "I think that if the Republicans try to sell Socialism Lite to the TEA party there is likely to be no sale."

The latest TEA party rallies are drawing throngs in their dozens.  The establishment is not afraid of them; thus, it does not care what they think.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at February 28, 2011 08:33 AM (xy9wk)

64 Don't say things like that. It makes John Boehner weepy and sad.

Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2011 01:24 PM (AZGON)

I think maybe it'd be useful for Boehner to get a bit weepy when describing the effects of Obama's government shutdown.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 28, 2011 08:33 AM (T0NGe)

65 He Who Hates Lawyers is right.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 01:24 PM (uFokq)

You should have a macro.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 28, 2011 08:34 AM (T0NGe)

66 @54: "The public are secret communists - they only support cuts if someone else is affected.

Not them."

Jesse Jackson (of all people) said it best back in the 80s: "Everybody wants to cut, nobody wants to bleed."

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at February 28, 2011 08:34 AM (xy9wk)

67 Boehner from yesterday:

“We have a moral responsibility to address the problems we face.  That means working together to cut spending and rein in government – NOT shutting it down.  The House has passed legislation – reflecting the will of the people – that would keep the government running through October while cutting spending.   The leader of the United States Senate has refused to allow a vote on this legislation, so the House will pass a shorter-term bill that will also keep the government running while including reasonable spending cuts at the same time.  This is very simple: Americans want the government to stay open, and they want it to spend less money.  We don’t need to shut down the government to accomplish that.  We just need to do what the American people are asking of us.”

Looks like he was definitely wrong about the staying open part. Also an interesting argument about making cuts, though how he thinks he can keep holding Reid to this is beyond me.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 28, 2011 08:35 AM (q8u+l)

68
He said no Republican can talk as well as Gov Christie. If you listen to McConnell or Boehner on Meet the Press, they recite their talking points and then if asked questions they get befuddled and stammer and then again recite their talking points.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 01:32 PM (uFokq)

They need to make Ryan the point man with the media.

Posted by: Quilly Mammoth at February 28, 2011 08:35 AM (4yjiA)

69 "handled correctly" and the Republican Party

I ask you, in all Seriousness, do these two terms go together? 

Newt and his Inflatable Ego botched the Shutdown in 1995; Bay-ner don't look like he wanna bring a knife or gun to this fight

Posted by: SantaRosaStan, whose Rip is no longer Torn at February 28, 2011 08:35 AM (UqKQV)

70 "Americans want the government to stay open, and they want it to spend less money," Boehner said. "We don't need to shut down the government to accomplish that. We just need to do what the American people are asking of us."

John, listen to me, it should be "The President doesn't need to shut down the government to accomplish that."

He's trying to shut the government down.  It's his fault. Unify the message here.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 28, 2011 08:36 AM (T0NGe)

71 The latest TEA party rallies are drawing throngs in their dozens.  The establishment is not afraid of them; thus, it does not care what they think

It doesn't matter because a lot of the TEA party principles have been absorbed/integrated by apolitical people as sensible and natural positions.  A lot of those old folks who were brow-beaten into voting for Obama last time against their better judgment have returned to their senses. 

That's why I've never been worried about the TEA party as some organized entity or "caucus."  It was truly grassroots.  It still exists as a movement without the rallies.

And, again, how many from the Left showed up to protest across the country this weekend?  I didn't even see Indy on the list.  I think Legal Insurrection had the breakdown. 

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 08:37 AM (pW2o8)

72 They will make it hard on some portion of the population (SS checks, etc) and blame Boehner and the GOP.

Nitpicking, but it seems that SS payments are protected. It's unlikely they will not be stopped in the event of a 'shutdown.'

"During the last major shutdown, which lasted about a month starting in late 1995, the Social Security Administration mailed checks throughout the crisis, and a close reading of established law makes clear the agency has the legal authority to do so again.

"I am absolutely sure the checks would be sent out," said John F. Cooney, a partner at law firm Venable who designed shutdown plans for the government while employed at the Office of Management and Budget." "

Posted by: goldbricker esq at February 28, 2011 08:37 AM (S59+B)

73 The Bad News Bears are saving Ryan's arm for the playoffs, evidently. Don't want to wear him out.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 08:37 AM (uFokq)

74

Jesse Jackson (of all people) said it best back in the 80s: "Everybody wants to cut, nobody wants to bleed."

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at February 28, 2011 01:34 PM (xy9wk)

That's a fallacy, bitch:  It ain't everybody who don't wanna bleed.  Lots of people have bled for this country and its / their principles

and Jesse Jackson is NEVER right.    Never

Posted by: SantaRosaStan, whose Rip is no longer Torn at February 28, 2011 08:38 AM (UqKQV)

75
  Right now, simply doing SOMETHING besides gumflapping and blame -shifting would be just dandy.

Posted by: irongrampa at February 28, 2011 08:38 AM (ud5dN)

76

What we're forgetting somehow is that the dems want a shutdown more than the repubs.  They've been looking foward to this like children going to Disneyland.  My opinion:  The dems want not only a shutdown but a paralyzing constitutional crisis.  Just look back on what this regime has done in the last year.  If I were a repub congressman, I'd be cautious about all of this too. 

Posted by: Soona at February 28, 2011 08:38 AM (efdtN)

77 Posted by: SantaRosaStan, whose Rip is no longer Torn at February 28, 2011 01:35 PM (UqKQV)

Did you notice the last words of my comment?

"And it won't happen."

My point was that it is entirely possible to win this battle. The Republicans hold all the cards and have momentum. Unfortunately their playbook says to fold. (sorry about the mixed metaphors).

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at February 28, 2011 08:39 AM (LH6ir)

78 Is there any budget trick that can be used at the state level to pick up the slack on services threatened by a shutdown?  Is there any way to point already allocated funds to the states or for individual governors to rebudget temporarily to make sure that the pain that Obama will try to cause will be lessened (at least in fiscally-responsible states)?  Just spit-balling here.

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 08:39 AM (pW2o8)

79 Nice try with the Tea Party numbers at rallies as some sort of Indicator

Tea Party people work for a living

Posted by: SantaRosaStan, whose Rip is no longer Torn at February 28, 2011 08:39 AM (UqKQV)

80 Next election I'm going to write in Turd Sandwhich, at least that way if it ends up winnijg at least then then ill know it will taste like shit.

Posted by: Mr Pink at February 28, 2011 08:40 AM (SwsAI)

81

I love me some caves!

Caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaave Mmmmmaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnn!!!!!

 

Posted by: Capt. Caveman at February 28, 2011 08:40 AM (pr+up)

82 I don't notice the last words of comments of anyone named "Dildo". I just don't

Please don't disturb my prolix poker metaphors with your logic and stuff

Posted by: SantaRosaStan, whose Rip is no longer Torn at February 28, 2011 08:41 AM (UqKQV)

83 Small Nuclear War Could Reverse Global Warming for Years  

Posted by: Jimmy Genttemann at February 28, 2011 08:41 AM (By4wu)

84

Back to the point Ace made last week- simply saying that you don't want a government "shutdown" doesn't necessarily imply that they'll cave to avoid one.

It would look bad if Republicans were going around talking up a shutdown- it would give the appearance of forcing a shutdown no matter what the Dems agree to, and I don't think that would go over well.

However, if they go out of their way to announce that they really, really want to avoid one, it gives them some cover if it does happen.  Something like "We did everything we could to avoid a shutdown, but the Dems and Obama refused to negotiate..."

 

Posted by: Hollowpoint at February 28, 2011 08:42 AM (SY2Kh)

85

If there is a government "shut down" the MFM will swing into action like it did in the 90s and blame the Republicans and do all of the usually stories of despair and hardship created by those EVIL monster Republicans.

As the great Brother Otter (Faber, '63 pre med/law) once opined, "I've got news for you, pal.  They're (MBM) going to nail us, no matter what we do.  So we might as well have a goooood time doing it.  Shut-Down!  Shut-Down!  Shut-Down!

Posted by: Count de Monet at February 28, 2011 08:42 AM (XBM1t)

86

Might be nice to remind people that the last government shutdown was precisely one year ago when Snowmageddon 2010 closed down DC. I don't recall civilization grinding to a halt; in fact, I remember there being some curiosity as to the large number of "non-essential" workers.

I think Boner is saying the right thing here by appearing to be conciliatory and wanting to avoid a shutdown. I will only be disappointed if he truly caves. Maybe it's just me, I don't feel a lot of public angst over the possibility of a government shutdown.

Posted by: Ghost of Lee Atwater at February 28, 2011 08:42 AM (JxMoP)

87 Well, back to my usual lament. Even if the GOP got a gift from heaven and wrenched $250 billion in cuts from the current budget, it still won't stop the growing debt and deficit. It is Kratos in the end. That, and the fact that eventually we will just print the money. We will not call it that but it will happen because there simply is not enough money out there.

Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2011 08:42 AM (AZGON)

88 If they cave again, what good are they? What is the point?

Could this lead to a deviation from the much vaunted "vote for the RINO, its important" creed?

Not being snide.  This is an extremely tough issue (though others would say its not tough, just say no) that has been debated ad nauseum on this blog.   Full disclosure: I've been leaning towards the just say no crowd since before the last election.  I voted for McCain, but I'm not sure I could keep up with this stench for much longer.

Posted by: countrydoc at February 28, 2011 08:42 AM (131HS)

89 With you on this one, Ace. 

Posted by: gary gulrud at February 28, 2011 08:43 AM (/g2vP)

90 Well of course the Speaker of the House is going to say in public that he doesn't want to shut down the government.  To do otherwise is to profess a sort of weird irresponsible nihilism.  And truth be told I don't want it shut down either.  Here's hoping that Obama & Reid cave completely without having a shutdown.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 28, 2011 08:43 AM (czcue)

91 Posted by: SantaRosaStan, whose Rip is no longer Torn at February 28, 2011 01:41 PM (UqKQV)

My wife is a master at mixed metaphors. I sometimes think that she does it on purpose, but they are just too effortless to be rehearsed.

The Republican party is at a crossroads, as Ace pointed out. What's the point of supporting them if they cave completely even when in a position of considerable strength?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sprostheticpenis (NJConservative) at February 28, 2011 08:44 AM (LH6ir)

92 @86
Yep.  I really don't see a problem with the public position that we want to avoid a shutdown. 

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 08:44 AM (pW2o8)

93 Cave? We had plenty of them in the 'stan.

Posted by: A. West-Bonafide CBC Member at February 28, 2011 08:45 AM (EL+OC)

94 Back to the point Ace made last week- simply saying that you don't want a government "shutdown" doesn't necessarily imply that they'll cave to avoid one.

Exactly.  Public vs. private negotiations.

Posted by: chemjeff at February 28, 2011 08:45 AM (czcue)

95 Gimme eat!!  Give everybody eat!!!!

Posted by: Major ______ de Coverly at February 28, 2011 08:45 AM (UqKQV)

96 speaking of Animal House... Bernie Madoff to his investors: You fucked up; you trusted me. He really said that. And he also said he was the victim because of all the stress from with living with his lie.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 08:45 AM (uFokq)

97 38...have to do it...can't we go 1 friggin thread without someone throwing a docking party for the Fat Boy from NJ? 

BTW, since I was flamed in the previous Christie thread when I wasn't around to defend myself, can't we get another Christie thread...with the added hawtness of Palin and the Fat Boy's comments about her this weekend?  Comment numbers guaranteed to be higher than Chuck Sheen's cocaine pile, hooker bill, self-love quotient.  

Posted by: The Hammer at February 28, 2011 08:45 AM (Ma+CH)

98 If the Republicans cave in like the cops in WI, there will be an active insurrection within two years.

Posted by: sifty at February 28, 2011 08:46 AM (Q6tnr)

99

The latest TEA party rallies are drawing throngs in their dozens.  The establishment is not afraid of them; thus, it does not care what they think.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at February 28, 2011 01:33 PM (xy9wk)

The tea party won the election, are winning in Wisconsin and have one the first round in the budget fight. I am not sure what there is to protest about yet. They have assigned a blogger to each congressman reporting what he or she is doing and letting the congressman know what they think.

I disagree with you, I think they are doing what they need to do.

Posted by: robtr at February 28, 2011 08:46 AM (hVDig)

100 Legal Insurrection continues to kick the shit out of the lying liars who are lying about the vast protests this weekend. 

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 08:46 AM (pW2o8)

101 People are for it now until SS checks get hung up.

Then.. they will turn on Republicans.

Posted by: Timbo at February 28, 2011 08:46 AM (ph9vn)

102

The Repubs are operating on a level that simply cannot fathom.

 

Posted by: dananjcon at February 28, 2011 08:47 AM (pr+up)

103

I'm trying to remember the adverse effects that I suffered the last time the govt shut down............................can't seem to come up with a fucking thing.

Shut that motherfucker down for a couple of weeks. I could care less.

Posted by: pendejo grande at February 28, 2011 08:47 AM (XUycH)

104 Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 01:45 PM (uFokq)

I hope that good old Bernie gets ass-raped a few times a day for the next several years, with pauses only for beatings. And then maybe someone will put a knife in his guts to put him out of our misery.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at February 28, 2011 08:47 AM (LH6ir)

105 94 @86
Yep.  I really don't see a problem with the public position that we want to avoid a shutdown. 

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 01:44 PM (pW2o

The only problem I see is the rhetoric.  The president is trying to engineer a shutdown, not the GOP House.  "We hope the president won't shut down the government." etc.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 28, 2011 08:48 AM (T0NGe)

106 69 They need to make Ryan the point man with the media.

He's busy reading Obama's budget, writing the FY 2012 budget, & likely considering options on entitlement reform. One would also hope the Rs have more than one well-known person who understands all these issues, since they have some impressive freshmen but no one really knows who they are. 

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 28, 2011 08:48 AM (q8u+l)

107 If you listen to McConnell or Boehner on Meet the Press, they recite their talking points and then if asked questions they get befuddled and stammer and then again recite their talking points.

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 01:32 PM (uFokq)

Sadly, this is what happens when you don't really know what you're talking about.  It seems to be a common problem with today's Reps.  There used to be a time when grown ups were in charge.  They didn't sniffle on TV, and when it came time to argue they knew their shit.  Granted - the wuss effect has plagued the Reps for a long time - I can only assume that cushy country-club life does that to a person and the party establishment loves blue bloods.  But nowadays its getting harder to find leaders that can pass the party's give-no-offense criteria while still knowing what the heck is going on.

Posted by: Reactionary at February 28, 2011 08:48 AM (xUM1Q)

108 BTW, since I was flamed in the previous Christie thread when I wasn't around to defend myself, can't we get another Christie thread...with the added hawtness of Palin and the Fat Boy's comments about her this weekend?

Is attacking Christie over some lame-ass interview question really a priority for you right now?  Geezus fucking chr*st. 

If so, go over to the Palin circle jerk at HotAir where they're over 100 comments on that vital issue in the Headlines. 

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 08:48 AM (pW2o8)

109 No SS checks will be held up. The law dictates they always go out.

If they are withheld it is due to malice and can be prosecuted.

Posted by: sifty at February 28, 2011 08:48 AM (Q6tnr)

110 Posted by: Timbo at February 28, 2011 01:46 PM (ph9vn)

Bring some facts to the table.

Social Security checks will be sent as usual if the government is in fact shut down.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at February 28, 2011 08:50 AM (LH6ir)

111 Women aren't allowed to say or write "circle jerk"


Posted by: Lt. Milo Minderbinder at February 28, 2011 08:50 AM (UqKQV)

112

@71: "John, listen to me, it should be "The President doesn't need to shut down the government to accomplish that.""

*hic*

*glassy-eyed smile*

Ahh, the El Prezhidente: 1 1/2 ounces white rum; 3/4 ounces dry vermouth; 1 splash red curaçao; Stir with ice. Strain into a cocktail glass. Garnish with a orange twist. 

Shee what boozhe overload hazh done to me?

*snicker*

Wunnerful, wunnerful drinkie-poo. 

*urp*

An' I will be thrishe-double-damned if I ever doezh anything that could harm shuch a beautiful lil' cocktail.

Beshidzh....guh...government shutdown shoundzh waaaaaaaaaaay to closhe to "lasht call."   And I am re....really againsht any short of lasht call.

Posted by: John *hic* Boehner at February 28, 2011 08:52 AM (xy9wk)

113 Blaming someone implies that a shutdown would be a bad thing.
Put more emphasis back on the states where it belongs.
The dhims and MBM are scared shitless that a shutdown (contrary to their meme) would go largely unnoticed except for their fucking screaming.

Posted by: ontherocks at February 28, 2011 08:52 AM (HBqDo)

114 The only problem I see is the rhetoric.  The president is trying to engineer a shutdown, not the GOP House.  "We hope the president won't shut down the government." etc. Might be helpful if Boehner sometimes read AOSHQ. Did he flunk Rhetoric 101?

Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2011 08:52 AM (AZGON)

115 Posted by: The Hammer at February 28, 2011 01:45 PM (Ma+CH)

If you are offended by being flamed, then maybe you are in the wrong place.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at February 28, 2011 08:53 AM (LH6ir)

116 107 94 The only problem I see is the rhetoric.  The president is trying to engineer a shutdown, not the GOP House.  "We hope the president won't shut down the government." etc.

That's what they've been saying, though. The question is what happens after Reid gets his time to consider and he says no. What will Boehner do then? Is he going to listen to those who say it must be an option, or does he want to keep getting tiny cuts in spending?

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 28, 2011 08:53 AM (q8u+l)

117 I think the problem truly does lie in the Senate. They have always been a lot squishier than the House Republicans.

Boner needs to show some Bone. I know we got all in their shit over there for not getting the 100B in the CR, but as that link I posted to the article at Watts Up, they did in fact cut some shit that really did need to be cut.

They just need to hold to their guns, no matter what the squishes in the Senate do. They have to remember that the House can force the budget in the end and that was the way the founders intended it.

As for the phony government shutdown, Boner needs to go on Fox and maybe CBS and explain how the only ones talking about a shutdown are the Dems and how it is no shutdown at all.


Posted by: Vic at February 28, 2011 08:53 AM (M9Ie6)

118  Small Nuclear War Could Reverse Global Warming for Years  

Posted by: Jimmy Genttemann at February 28, 2011 01:41 PM (By4wu)

I can recommend some areas to nuke.  I think this is worth a try.

Posted by: Reactionary at February 28, 2011 08:53 AM (xUM1Q)

119 Ahh, the El Prezhidente

Really?  I thought it was tequila and Coke. 

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 08:54 AM (pW2o8)

120 Might be helpful if Boehner sometimes read AOSHQ. Did he flunk Rhetoric 101?

Posted by: George Orwell at February 28, 2011 01:52 PM (AZGON)

My consulting fees are relatively low, he doesn't have to skim past the lace wigs spam that way.

Posted by: AmishDude at February 28, 2011 08:54 AM (T0NGe)

121 $60 billion is a windfall? Whose side are you on, Ace?

Posted by: EvilRedScandi at February 28, 2011 08:55 AM (M+Vm5)

122 Dude, did you forget last week? The GOP is already dead to us. Expect the worst, because that is what they will deliver. It all must come down before any action is taken.

Posted by: ma'fi mishkilla at February 28, 2011 08:55 AM (le5qc)

123 Catch-22

If the Republicans don't cave, the "Shutdown !!!!!111!!!!! " screaming begins immediately and everyone who gets or someday anticipates getting govt money gets skeered

If the Republicans cave, the Purity Police freak out and the Dems and MFM start doing their non-stop War Dance and ratchet up the stakes.  And nothing is gained.

"It's better to live on your feet than die on your knees" ( Rep view )

or

"It's better to live on your knees than die on your feet"  ( Dem view )


Posted by: Joseph Heller at February 28, 2011 08:58 AM (UqKQV)

124 I was listening to that sickening hate-filled unfunny Stephanie Miller this morning. She was snickering over the fact that supposedly some WI newspapers were taking back their endorsements of Scott Walker. It's probably not even true, but even if it is...have you ever heard anything so absurd?

Posted by: Soothsayer al dente at February 28, 2011 08:58 AM (uFokq)

125 The GOP really does need to hold to their guns on this, particularly in the House.

And they really do need to come up with really significant cuts in the next full budget. Cuts that actually zero out some departments and actually fires some people.

If they don't it is a sure sign that they will lose the the fiscal cons from the three-legged Republican stool.

Posted by: Vic at February 28, 2011 08:59 AM (M9Ie6)

126 B-buh, b-b-b-buh,

And when two lovers woo
They still say: I love you
On that you can rely
No matter what the future brings
As time goes by

Posted by: Barky the Budget Crooner at February 28, 2011 09:00 AM (GwPRU)

127 A colleague ran over to me to tell me that "boehner said there would be no government shutdown".   He seemed quite happy, he's an old republican but he said he remembers the nonsense that went on the last time this happened, how the republicans "got creamed" and ushered in the election of Clinton".   I don't know much about this whole situation but in his mind it was horrible, unfair and worked.  Made me wonder if most old republicans are thinking as he is.  Truthfully, I"m with you dude, I'm not up for another disappointment.  I often wonder if they realize how perilous the country's situation is cause they act as though we are fiscally strong and able to literally "take on the world".  That's starting to make a lot of people very uncomfortable as they can't tell if they are "in denial" , playing "politics as usual" or "really on the same team so it doesn't matter".  

Posted by: curious at February 28, 2011 09:01 AM (p302b)

128

@75: "It ain't everybody who don't wanna bleed.  Lots of people have bled for this country and its / their principles"

He was speaking metaphorically - everyone wants to cut spending, they just don't want to cut the spending that benefits them.  Remember, the original TEA party rallies were old folks demanding that their SS/Medicare payments be left alone.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at February 28, 2011 09:02 AM (xy9wk)

129 If the Pubs shut down the government a lot of posters here would just find something else to complain about regard to the same issue. They didnt di it wuick enough!!! They are going to cave to get it restarted!!!! I remember when 100% of the Pubs voted agInst healthcare reform and more than a few complained that they basically caved because they did not filibuster. It's in their nature that whatever is done was never enough.

Posted by: polynikes at February 28, 2011 09:03 AM (R9YVs)

130 110...actually, I don't care about his comments on Palin, per sey.  I do care about his positions on important issues that don't line up with conservative principles.  And that discussion needs to happen...has to happen...or we're truly done. 


117...not offended in the least...disappointed that after my comment that drew so much fire, I had to check out and wasn't around to retort. 


Posted by: The Hammer at February 28, 2011 09:03 AM (Ma+CH)

131 Here is Rasmussen's list of questions. Note question #4:

4* If Democrats and Republicans fail to reach a budget agreement soon, there will be a partial shutdown of the federal government. Payments for things like Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment benefits would continue, but some federal government services could be shut down until an agreement is reached. Would a partial shutdown of the federal government be good for the economy, bad for the economy, or have no impact on the economy?

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 28, 2011 09:04 AM (q8u+l)

132 I remember when 100% of the Pubs voted agInst healthcare reform and more than a few complained that they basically caved because they did not filibuster.

Considering we had the votes for a filibuster but not an outright block of Obamacare, the cloture vote WAS effectively the vote to pass it.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at February 28, 2011 09:04 AM (bxvFd)

133 Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at February 28, 2011 02:02 PM (xy9wk)

There was a guy on Batchelor last week who wrote a book outlining a quick way to truly fix social security.  I'll try and find the podcast when I have time.  But the guy explained his plan and after listening to him you began to realize that social security is not in as bad a shape as we have been led to believe.  Pass a few laws making sure that congress keeps their paws off the money.  Change the age at which you begin receiving benefits and a bunch of other stuff and you are good to go.   medicare and Medicaid seem to be a way for people to abuse the system.  It's the CDO's of the federal government and it needs to have a team of ninja forensic accountants descend upon it like a bunch of locusts.

Posted by: curious at February 28, 2011 09:06 AM (p302b)

134 actually, I don't care about his comments on Palin, per sey.  I do care about his positions on important issues that don't line up with conservative principles.  And that discussion needs to happen...has to happen...or we're truly done.  I like the cut of your jib, young man. Double grog ration tonight.

Posted by: Purity Reichsminister Jeff at February 28, 2011 09:11 AM (ssbB6)

135 Pass a few laws making sure that congress keeps their paws off the money.

Yeah, that'll happen.

They've been raiding the kitty since LBJ was in office, so it would be a gigantic financial hit to replenish the SS "fund" with actual cash as opposed to IOUs for T-Bills.

Posted by: Brandon In Baton Rouge at February 28, 2011 09:11 AM (bxvFd)

136 As I said.  The dems want chaos.  The dems need chaos.  If a shutdown comes into being, the prez and the senate dems will find a way to shut down SS and all government medical payments too.  They need a bona fide American crisis to look like they're the cavalry coming to the rescue.  Either that or create a very real constitutional crisis.  I always come back to the perception that 30-40% of the "new age" public-school-educated generations will have.  I got an eye-full and an ear-full of that this last weekend.

Posted by: Soona at February 28, 2011 09:11 AM (efdtN)

137 The unfunded liabilities for Social Security are smaller to Medicare and Medicaid-- which is why the House is targeting Medicare and Medicaid first. See slide 6.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 28, 2011 09:11 AM (q8u+l)

138 Considering we had the votes for a filibuster but not an outright block of Obamacare, the cloture vote WAS effectively the vote to pass it.

We didn't have the votes for a filibuster for the actual bill, only for the "fixes" that occurred afterward.

I would also like to see the Constitutionality of the bill be also challenged on they way they subverted the Constitution to have it "originate" in the House.

They did that by taking a bill that had already been passed in the house as part of an appropriation for vets, striking every sentence in it and replacing it with health-scam and calling it an amendment.

But Republicans don't want to do that because they may want to use that sane fraud in the future.

Posted by: Vic at February 28, 2011 09:12 AM (M9Ie6)

139

@101: "The tea party won the election"

No, they helped win some seats in the House.  There wasn't any sort of clean sweep of the Congress, and the Dems have rebounded fairly well.  Yes, their numbers are reduced, but they are still largely in control, and where they aren't, they are dictating the terms of fight.

"[they] are winning in Wisconsin and have one the first round in the budget fight. I am not sure what there is to protest about yet."

Yet? They need to maintain protests about spending/entitlements/the deficit/etc. Also, what first round did they win?  Deficit spending, monetization of debt, etc. continue apace.  Token spending cuts are nice, I guess, but they are ultimately just token cuts.

"They have assigned a blogger to each congressman reporting what he or she is doing and letting the congressman know what they think."

Oooh, one whole blogger per Congresscritter? Jesus, they must be shaking in their boots.

"I disagree with you, I think they are doing what they need to do."

Time will tell, but my vote is on "sound and fury signifying nothing".  I'd like them to be successful, but I don't see it happening.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at February 28, 2011 09:14 AM (xy9wk)

140 actually, I don't care about his comments on Palin, per sey.  I do care about his positions on important issues that don't line up with conservative principles.  And that discussion needs to happen...has to happen...or we're truly done. 

Really? 

"with the added hawtness of Palin and the Fat Boy's comments about her this weekend?"

Give me a break.

Posted by: Y-not at February 28, 2011 09:17 AM (pW2o8)

141 The only problem I see is the rhetoric. The president is trying to engineer a shutdown, not the GOP House. "We hope the president won't shut down the government." etc.

That's kinda the point; if a shut-down does occur, Rebublicans want a plausible way to pin it on Obama. The GOP might be perfectly happy with a shut-down if that's what it takes for the Dems to agree to meaningful spending cuts, but it's not in their best interest to say so publicly. 

I don't know if the GOP will completely cave or not (with Dems holding the Senate and White House, they won't get everything they wanted).  By making it clear that they've been trying to avoid a shut-down, though, it's easier to paint the Dems as being too stubborn to negotiate.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at February 28, 2011 09:21 AM (SY2Kh)

142

@135: "There was a guy on Batchelor last week who wrote a book outlining a quick way to truly fix social security.  I'll try and find the podcast when I have time.  But the guy explained his plan and after listening to him you began to realize that social security is not in as bad a shape as we have been led to believe.  Pass a few laws making sure that congress keeps their paws off the money.  Change the age at which you begin receiving benefits and a bunch of other stuff and you are good to go."

If it can be fixed, great.  I know I won't live to see a dime of it regardless, and I still don't see how robbing people to pay other people for something that is largely the other person's obligation to fund during his/her working life is exactly kosher.  But the point was that the initial protests were still people demanding their free money.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at February 28, 2011 09:21 AM (xy9wk)

143 Why do we need bloggers to cover our congresscritters when we should be doing that already? These bloggers are, in a sense, taking on the jobs of constituents and each individual community in making choices about elected officials. My community can & should make the choice about if & when my congressman should be replaced.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 28, 2011 09:22 AM (q8u+l)

Posted by: Nicholas Kronos at February 28, 2011 09:26 AM (KktlX)

145 (Sorry for the double-post...it posted when I was entering user info.)

I'm all for the GOP standing firm, but I wouldn't put any faith in those close poll numbers. If it happens, the media will get to work giving everyone nonstop reasons to think it's terrible and it's the GOP's fault.

Posted by: Nicholas Kronos at February 28, 2011 09:28 AM (KktlX)

146 Shut it down for a year. Show how useless and redundant most of Washington is.

Then switch to part-time legislature.

Posted by: sifty at February 28, 2011 09:33 AM (Q6tnr)

147 Bring some facts to the table.

Social Security checks will be sent as usual if the government is in fact shut down.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at February 28, 2011 01:50 PM

I was just reading that in 93, the min amount of employees were in place but it wasnt enough and the backlog started .... millions went without a SS check.

Maybe since we have direct deposit now.. it wouldnt be interupted...??
No idea.
Republicans "cause" SS checks to be late and .. watch the SHTF

Posted by: Timbo at February 28, 2011 09:34 AM (ph9vn)

148 #145:

The professional Tea Party, Inc types are getting too "organized" for comfort. I fear this is just a fund-raising stunt. Each email "update" will be accompanied by a request for cash.

Posted by: sifty at February 28, 2011 09:38 AM (Q6tnr)

149 #149

What's the worst that could happen?

52% of the voters and 100% of the idiots in this country already supported Obama in 2008 and almost all of them still do.

Maybe a few of these numbnuts will start asking questions if the SHTF. At least after they loot a bit.

Doubtful, but possible.


Posted by: sifty at February 28, 2011 09:41 AM (Q6tnr)

150 150 #145: The professional Tea Party, Inc types are getting too "organized" for comfort. I fear this is just a fund-raising stunt. Each email "update" will be accompanied by a request for cash.

Exactly. They have also forgotten that being small government means being pro-community responsibility. One of the reasons the federal government is so large is because said communities were allowed to neglect said responsibilities, and now this federal group is indirectly sponsoring the same. These people also might be from different states than the lawmakers in question, thus making them incapable of understanding local issues. Also, is their definition of Tea Party the same as my Tea Party? Are they conservative or libertarian? Do they allow for honest debates in that arena? So many things to consider.

Posted by: Miss'80sBaby at February 28, 2011 09:45 AM (q8u+l)

151 Anything that Dick Armey and Newt Gingrich is involved in is suspect.

My Tea Party is my wife, myself, and the people I see at my local rally. It stretches from my front door, to the rally, to the ballot box.

It isn't some expensive bus full of professional protesters and fund-raisers. I leave that bullshit to the Democrats and unions.

Posted by: sifty at February 28, 2011 09:51 AM (Q6tnr)

152

Why no response for

"I give the 'Pubbies credit

For shutting it down!"

Posted by: Haiku Guy at February 28, 2011 10:05 AM (Bhe/R)

153 with Dems holding the Senate and White House, they won't get everything they wanted

I am the juggernaut!

Posted by: Debt Ceiling at February 28, 2011 10:23 AM (GTbGH)

154 I remember when 100% of the Pubs voted agInst healthcare reform and more than a few complained that they basically caved because they did not filibuster.

It's in their nature that whatever is done was never enough.

Posted by: polynikes at February 28, 2011 02:03 PM (R9YVs)

ObamaCare passed and is the un-Constitutional law of the land.  Clearly, whatever was done was not enough .... not even close.

You should search for a better example, because what the GOP did with ObamaCare was awful.  Maybe you wanted to point out how the GOP attended that asinine summit to get ObamaCare back up and running after it was killed dead with the Scott Brown election.

Posted by: Henry Harold Humphries - you can call me 'H' at February 28, 2011 11:19 AM (Ikk5M)

155 Great blog. Get answers to all your questions and practical recommendations for implementation, taking into account many important nuances.

Posted by: academic writers wanted at March 02, 2011 11:58 PM (vkgn4)

156 In fact, pillow block bearings is a type of variations of deep groove ball bearings, the features is that the outside diameter surface of it outside track is in shape sphere, which can match concave sphere in bearing block so as to realize the function of self centering.

Posted by: China Bearing at March 03, 2011 12:19 AM (3W4Ou)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
164kb generated in CPU 0.32, elapsed 2.2716 seconds.
62 queries taking 2.0479 seconds, 392 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.