Ace of Spades HQ

October 16, 2013

An Upbeat Assessment of the Shutdown
— Ace

His piece is worth a read. His main takeaway is that the Tea Party has asserted itself, which is actually good for public policy.

But he has some criticisms:

In short, all in all, the Shutdown makes me hopeful for the future of the Tea Party, the Republican Party and America. It showed that the Tea Party has produced a significant number of elected officials with integrity and willing to go through political fire to enact their goals, and can push the GOP in the right direction.
Now, is that all?
No. It is also true that the Tea Party promotes some bad policies like premature austerity, sometimes (letÂ’s admit it) has a Â“reality problemÂ” and very often has a tactics/strategy problem. But, the GOP Establishment also promotes some disastrous policies, and along with adding to the supply of chaff, the Tea Party has brought the best wheat the GOP has had in a very long time.

I don't know about "premature austerity." Let me note that the one large-economy Western nation which has come out rather well in this crisis is Germany, which is running a small, almost now wiped out, budget deficit, and also has fairly low unemployment.

Contrast that to everyone else, who are running high deficits and have high unemployment.

Is Germany exceptional? Or is that German policy is exceptional, but other countries could expect the same results were they to implement the same policy?

One thing that galls me -- or anyone with Tea Party tendencies -- is this uncritical, unchallenged acceptance of Herd Convetional Wisdom simply because the other members of the Herd have decided it's easiest to just not think about things and default to the Conventional Wisdom.

My sneaking suspicion is that most people who champion the Herd Conventional Wisdom only do so because other members of the Herd have done so; that is, it has become a majority position for no better reason than a majority of people believe it's the majority position.

This, I think, gets at the heart of the Tea Party's deep skepticism towards the Establishment or the Conventional Wisdom it embraces: That its positions have largely been adopted for social reasons -- conformity, of course, the paramount social consideration -- and not for intellectual, philosophical, economic, or mathematical reasons.

It's not that the Tea Party doesn't like thinking or rejects "logic" or is "crazy" or all the other epithets applied to them. It's that they strongly suspect that the Conventional Wisdom has been adopted, and is being translated into governing philosophy, for not better reason than the fact that is is Conventional. And that few in the leadership class -- which really should do a lot more thinking about things if they want credit for thinking about things -- ever examine whether the basis for this Conventional Wisdom is firm or infirm.

I think when the party is having a fight about First Principles, it is better to actually start talking about First Principles than to keep papering over the obvious disagreement. Who knows, perhaps after a real discussion of First Principles, the party could refashion some kind of a new consensus.

Posted by: Ace at 12:19 PM | Comments (282)
Post contains 537 words, total size 3 kb.

1 And note.... that if the German Government had not gone down the Green Energy road, their economy would be doing even better...

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 16, 2013 12:20 PM (lZBBB)

2 but am I FIRST?

Posted by: ButwhaddaIknow? at October 16, 2013 12:21 PM (5aT64)

3 YAY! MOAR POLITICS!!

Posted by: Countrysquire at October 16, 2013 12:21 PM (LSJmV)

4 Ohh.... and the herd mentality is the basis of Democracy... something the Founding Father's were afraid of.... but we have embraced.

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 16, 2013 12:22 PM (lZBBB)

5 One feature the Tea Party has going for it is the relative immunity from worrying about how they are perceived. Not getting invited to cocktail parties doesn't seem to faze anyone.

Posted by: Roy at October 16, 2013 12:22 PM (VndSC)

6 "premature austerity" fighting fraud

Posted by: panzernashorn at October 16, 2013 12:23 PM (MhA4j)

7 my suspicion is that you have to live on the east coast to even notice a government shutdown.

Posted by: X at October 16, 2013 12:23 PM (KHo8t)

8 Seriously, keep in mind that Cruz stated at the beginning was what he was trying to do was start a movement. These things don't happen overnight, and it looks like it pushed Boehner further than he would have normally gone. Much further.

Posted by: Countrysquire at October 16, 2013 12:23 PM (LSJmV)

9 Wait is the tea party the herd or is the establishment the herd? Because either way you need a herd, lone wolves don't get much done in politics (well not in a way we can talk about).

Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 12:23 PM (CMlD4)

10 ...don't fight fraud on my watch!

Posted by: Republican Leadership at October 16, 2013 12:23 PM (MhA4j)

11 Matters little, the hull was breached long ago and the ship will sink. The most they can do now is run the pumps to slow down the flooding

Last night I compared it to the Titanic

Wrong. Titanic's officers at least took the hit themselves and aided the passengers

Our ship of state is the Concordia. The officers ran it into rocks and are shoving the passengers aside to save themselves first

Posted by: kbdabear at October 16, 2013 12:23 PM (aTXUx)

12 And you know what else? We get to say I Told You So when obamacare blows up in everyones faces! /mwahahahaha /jerkoff hand gesture

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 12:25 PM (U/ZJP)

13 a Â“reality problemÂ” The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money. The problem is that this country is running untenable deficits. That's the reality. The "problem" is that Liberal America doesn't recognize the problem. We're broke. That's reality.

Posted by: BlueStateRebel at October 16, 2013 12:26 PM (7ObY1)

14 Part of the problem is that we still see the mainstream pointing out all the problems of austerity in Europe, and when we look at the actual austere policies, they involve raising taxes and not reducing spending. At best, it means austerity for taxpayers, not austerity for government. At worst (IÂ’m looking at you, Krugman) itÂ’s the austerity of the drunkard: redefine Â‘abstinenceÂ’ to mean Â‘drink moreÂ’. Then, when abstinence fails, you can tell your family youÂ’re just going to go back to the conventional wisdom of drinking more.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at October 16, 2013 12:26 PM (QF8uk)

15 7. X 17% shut-down of unessential gov employees 83% same as usual Meanwhile, ALL TAXES REMAIN BEING PAID ON SCHEDULE, revenue flowing into the IRS/federal government.

Posted by: Republican Leadership at October 16, 2013 12:26 PM (MhA4j)

16 If Hollowpoint is reading this, I saw your comments on the Alternate News Dump thread this morning and I got your message loud and clear.

Those of us who are too thick to try and grasp the exquisite intricacies are not welcome in the GOP

Thanks for making my choices easy

Posted by: kbdabear at October 16, 2013 12:26 PM (aTXUx)

17 The Tea Party needs some big Senate RINO scalps in the 2014 Primaries, to move forward

Posted by: Jackj at October 16, 2013 12:26 PM (4WesI)

18 I like asking this question once a month: What in the heck are the Republicans gonna run on in 2014? Or in 2016?

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 12:27 PM (U/ZJP)

19 7 my suspicion is that you have to live on the east coast to even notice a government shutdown. Or if you work in the import/export biz like I do. (Unlike George Costanza, I do both the importing AND the exporting.)

Posted by: BlueStateRebel at October 16, 2013 12:27 PM (7ObY1)

20 >>>>One feature the Tea Party has going for it is the relative immunity from worrying about how they are perceived. Not getting invited to cocktail parties doesn't seem to faze anyone. yeahhhh... I don't know if that's entirely a good thing. What I believe is that LIV/non-ideological/disengaged people adopt their politics largely for social reasons or ego reasons. They pick a party that permits them to think well of themselves. I think people ignore this -- which I think is so obvious and plain that I'll call it a straight-up fact -- at their peril. I think there's not just an indifference among the Tea Party to Scare the Bear stuff (that is, stuff that will provoke/upset the slumbering American dunces) but an actual affirmative desire to Scare the Bear. And i don't mean scare them about Democrat socialist policy -- I mean some seem to have this idea that they should make themselves as Scary as possible because that proves how Hardcore they are. Like, some people really like claiming the mantle of the Angry Young Man. one thing I like about Ted Cruz is that he doesn't do this sort of thing, but strives to appear measured and reasonable at all times.

Posted by: ace at October 16, 2013 12:27 PM (/IWYB)

21 The RNC, and Beltway GOP is hoping we forget. That may have happened in the past, but no this time. We have the RINO's on record for Cloture in the Senate

Posted by: Jackj at October 16, 2013 12:27 PM (4WesI)

22 The CW is accepted by people because it is almost always an illusion that pain and hard choices can be avoided. People don't like to have their mellow harshed and so you will not see the CW swing to 'We're in some deep shit and hard choices and suffering are coming' until the house is burning down around our ears. If then.

Posted by: toby928© at October 16, 2013 12:28 PM (QupBk)

23 Grover N., Mike Medved, National Review, Fox News etc... All Faux conservatives and RINO's

Posted by: Jackj at October 16, 2013 12:29 PM (4WesI)

24 My cat loves pie.

Posted by: Soona at October 16, 2013 12:29 PM (3Mz5/)

25 9 - Herds don't follow a lead lamb. They follow something stronger. The Left gets it ... They have batshit crazy fighters at the top. We have a Drunk with a skin tone that rhymes with nothing.

Posted by: ScoggDog at October 16, 2013 12:29 PM (kWzSH)

26 19. Constitutional Integrity: Liberty!

Posted by: panzernashorn at October 16, 2013 12:29 PM (MhA4j)

Wait is the tea party the herd or is the establishment the herd? Because either way you need a herd, lone wolves don't get much done in politics (well not in a way we can talk about).

"One man with courage makes a majority."

-Andrew Jackson, man who single-handedly destroyed the National Bank, ignored the Supreme Court, and annihilated British troops at New Orleans.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 16, 2013 12:29 PM (TpXEI)

28 NOW do we get to hoist the black flag & start slitting throats???

Posted by: rickb223 at October 16, 2013 12:29 PM (p9JxP)

29 Or if you work in the import/export biz like I do.>>

Customs slow down or shutdown? I'm waiting for a new piece of equipment from Germany and it's late. I assumed it was due to Oktoberfest.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at October 16, 2013 12:30 PM (wrS2o)

30 God Bless Ted Cruz and God Bless Texas 🇺🇸🌟🇺🇸

Posted by: Extremely grumpy momma bear at October 16, 2013 12:30 PM (hfSl/)

31 5 One feature the Tea Party has going for it is the relative immunity from worrying about how they are perceived. Not getting invited to cocktail parties doesn't seem to faze anyone. It's a Jacksonian thing, now forget to invite them to a turkey shoot and you might have a problem

Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 12:30 PM (CMlD4)

32 >>>The Left gets it ... They have batshit crazy fighters at the top. not exactly. Obama is careful to always claim to be, and present himself as, the ne plus ultra of moderation, reasonableness, and lack of drama. We know those things to be false, but he pushes that image relentlessly. I hear people on the right say "we should be just as out-on-a-limb as the left." But in fact the left lies-- they are always claiming that socialism is actually "common sense centrism," obviously.

Posted by: ace at October 16, 2013 12:30 PM (/IWYB)

33 I think what has happened (if you are a conservative) is the absolute best scenario possible. Conservatives fought for the middle class, and can demonstrate that but the whole disaster that is Obamacare is coming down and everyone gets to see what a shit storm that is. Right before primary season and mid terms. Oh, Mr establishment, you wanted to go along to get along and not fight against this turd? Good luck with that in the primary. Oh Mrs democrat you wanted this for the middle class, while exempting congress, big business and the unions? Good luck with that in November. Get out and vote them out. Tell your family tell your friends. Even the ones who voted for Obama twice, I think their eyes and minds might be a little more open in about 365 days.

Posted by: traye at October 16, 2013 12:30 PM (WJODe)

34 I always hoped a Conservative Billionaire would have bought GE, Viacom etc and taken over CBS,NBC etc... Much better money spent than propping up RINO's like Romney

Posted by: Jackj at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (4WesI)

35 Germany is not the the only western country with a small deficit. Canada as well. Obama's 2012 deficit garnered an additional debt of $4600.00 per citizen. Under Stephen Harper...Canada's conservative Prime Minister, its 2012 deficit garnered an additional debt of $600.00 per citizen. Your Marxist borrowed almost 7.5 TIMES as much money per citizen. Think about that.

Posted by: doowleb at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (r+Gn+)

36 We have a Drunk with a skin tone that rhymes with nothing. ISWYDT. Well played.

Posted by: rickb223 at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (p9JxP)

37 What in the heck are the Republicans gonna run on in 2014? Or in 2016?

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 04:27 PM (U/ZJP)

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

I love to rent my treadmill to them.

Posted by: Soona at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (3Mz5/)

38 That Germany is in as good shape as it is, is a miracle. After all they had to absorb the toxic wasteland called East Germany into West Germany and fix all the devastation the Communists left in regards to pollution, infrastructure, and economy.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (bfAee)

39 "....sometimes (letÂ’s admit it) has a Â“reality problemÂ” MATH is reality and that's what the Tea Party ran on.

Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami - GO CARDS!!! at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (bCEmE)

40 Tea Party is also relatively new, hopefully they improve their tactics, it's a pretty loose knit group right now. It's the closest thing to a new political group that is actually affecting anything in a long time.

Posted by: The Jackhole at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (nTgAI)

41 Ace Wrote: "My sneaking suspicion is that most people who champion the Herd Conventional Wisdom only do so because other members of the Herd have done so; that is, it has become a majority position for no better reason than a majority of people believe it's the majority position." Probably get slapped for this, but yeah, like the "natural born citizen" issue. The Majority opinion is just fucking wrong. It is based on a series of endless repetitions going all the way back to William Rawle and his "A View of the Constitution."

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (bb5+k)

42 A few months ago when we we're riding with 3! huge scandals going against obama, I said I just don't want the Republicans to come out of this with just their dicks in their hand*. They did, exactly. And they did it again, today. * a reference from The Godfather from the scene when Sonny makes sure Clemenza plants the gun behind the toilet for Michael.

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (U/ZJP)

"What I believe is that LIV/non-ideological/disengaged people adopt their politics largely for social reasons or ego reasons. They pick a party that permits them to think well of themselves."

No doubt this applies to a large percentage of people, however I believe if there is an issue and two clearly defined and articulated plans to deal with that issue, even LIV/non-ideological and some disengaged people will take a side most consistent with their worldview.

We lack any plan. Therefore we cannot compete in the marketplace of ideas.

Posted by: jwest at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (u2a4R)

I guess we can all agree that the country and the Dems are headed in the wrong direction, right? I'll hand the Dems credit for this: They used the MFM to dupe the GOP into vilifying the Tea Party. So when the GOP and it's professional squishes (looking right at YOU Gabe) start whining and complaining about wasting our money to primary these schmucks, just remember this:

You Folded. You Did. You Own This Mess. You Spineless Self Serving Wussies. You think you know how to run a country - you use it as a punch line at parties.... (you all know the rant).

Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (l0lja)

45 >>>I think when the party is having a fight about First Principles, it is better to actually start talking about First Principles than to keep papering over the obvious disagreement. Who knows, perhaps after a real discussion of First Principles, the party could refashion some kind of a new consensus

What does even MEAN, Ace? Are we talking about political first principles? Philosophical ones? Theological? Strategic?

Because I would submit there is literally only a sliver's worth of daylight between me, RINO grandee, and the Ultimate Teahhadist in terms of political goals. For god's sake, I'm markedly to your right.

What the disagreement here is about isn't "first principles," to the extent that people on either side are even capable of excavating their own true first principles anyway. It's about strategy and tactics. Which is why the attacks from certain people that anyone who disagreed with the Shutdown really just "secretly loved Obamacare" were both risible and infuriating.

I don't think what you wrote here is really very coherent, to be honest.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (n/+FT)

46 It's all fine and dandy that we fought the good fight, except we lost. It's kinda like being proud to die for your Country, but as Patton said it is better to make that other poor bastard die for his Country. And as long as we have the squishes we have in the Senate we are fucked 6 ways to Sunday. And we are about to get rick rolled on Amnesty. Hold on folks it's gonna be a bumpy ride. Oh and here's a shout out to a nuclear Iran which now has obama's blessings

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (UbDLm)

47 Â…and annihilated British troops at New Orleans. I believe he had some assistance with that.

Posted by: American troops at October 16, 2013 12:31 PM (QF8uk)

48 > NOW do we get to hoist the black flag & start slitting throats???

Posted by: rickb223 at October 16, 2013 04:29 PM (p9JxP)

once we identify The Hill To Die On, sure

also there is no hill worth dying on

Posted by: Wealthy Secure Do-Nothing Republican Motherfuckers at October 16, 2013 12:32 PM (8sCoq)

49 This "herd" mentality is nothing new, Ace. And that is what irks me most about the Tea Party purists. They get a hold of something and don't even bother examining the usefulness of the position/demand. Take the Vitter Amendment, for instance.

I doubt very few people fighting for it even knows what it means and what it does to the poor working slobs in Congress. But it becomes a hill to die on.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 16, 2013 12:32 PM (f9c2L)

50 re 14:
"
The problem is that this country is running untenable deficits.

That's the reality.

The "problem" is that Liberal America doesn't recognize the problem.
"
====

you're correct but the Libs and leftists will ultimately see the final mess as the inevitable outcome of unbridled capitalism

Posted by: mallfly at October 16, 2013 12:32 PM (bJm7W)

51 4 Ohh.... and the herd mentality is the basis of Democracy... something the Founding Father's were afraid of.... but we have embraced. Posted by: Romeo13 at October 16, 2013 04:22 PM (lZBBB) The founders feared Democracy as much, if not more than they did Monarchy.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 12:33 PM (bb5+k)

52 If Hollowpoint is reading this, I saw your comments on the Alternate News Dump thread this morning and I got your message loud and clear.

Those of us who are too thick to try and grasp the exquisite intricacies are not welcome in the GOP

You'll be happy to know that there exists a place for people like yourself- those who have difficult with simple, everyday reality.

True, they'll make you surrender your shoelaces when you enter, but they'll give you a nice padded hockey helmet for free.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at October 16, 2013 12:33 PM (SY2Kh)

53 I don't care what people think of us tea party types One of our lead voices has runner's legs and huge sweater puppies WIN!!!!

Posted by: Navycopjoe at October 16, 2013 12:33 PM (9TME+)

>>>And i don't mean scare them about Democrat socialist policy -- I mean some seem to have this idea that they should make themselves as Scary as possible because that proves how Hardcore they are.

Like, some people really like claiming the mantle of the Angry Young Man.<<<

Rep. Joe "Crazy Eyes" Walsh is now hosting a radio show, so it is somewhat self-limiting.

Posted by: Roy at October 16, 2013 12:33 PM (VndSC)

And amazingly, nothing on the MSN homepage about healthcare.gov and the swimming success it has been so far (at last count, 36,000 "enrolled" - no word yet as to whether that means actually purchased health insurance or merely registered).

I'm sure they'll get right on that......

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at October 16, 2013 12:33 PM (PZ6/M)

56 McConnell and Reid has made their Missouri Compromise. May God have mercy on us that we don't repeat history.

Posted by: Hanoverfist at October 16, 2013 12:33 PM (ecN6u)

57 Epic post, ace. Damn fine work.

Posted by: Felonious Monks at October 16, 2013 12:33 PM (0duDc)

58 one thing I like about Ted Cruz is that he doesn't do this sort of thing, but strives to appear measured and reasonable at all times.

Posted by: ace at October 16, 2013 04:27 PM

I'd love for once to have a politician who negotiates with Harry Reid the same way that Michael Corleone negotiated with Pat Geary

Posted by: kbdabear at October 16, 2013 12:34 PM (aTXUx)

59 Ok a political thread & I will be political. That being said, I think this is a good piece. I am not a radical or crazy, I just believe in a balanced budget and decent regulatory practices where we can all work & make a living. TFG & others like him believe that govt can be all things for all people. It simply can not. And if the minority party doesn't want to focus that message to the masses then we are all doomed to default, crash & burn.

Posted by: Misanthropic humanitarian, now with 50% more sensitivity at October 16, 2013 12:34 PM (HVff2)

60 What happens if this bill doesn't pass?

Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 12:35 PM (CMlD4)

61 >What in the heck are the Republicans gonna run on in 2014? Or in 2016?

We have Washington experience and extensive contacts. We have the best parking spaces and standing reservations at the best restaurants in town. And have you seen our shoes? They're like butter.

Posted by: Wealthy Secure Do-Nothing Republican Motherfuckers at October 16, 2013 12:35 PM (8sCoq)

62 Total victory for Obama. He said he wouldn't bend. He didn't and the GOP has completely folded.

Posted by: Harry at October 16, 2013 12:35 PM (gtPkC)

63 >>>The Left gets it ... They have batshit crazy fighters at the top.

No they don't. They have grey charismaless operators like Reid or smooth hucksters like Obama who talk a magnificently deceptive game about being "moderate" even whilst being very liberal.

Which is actually what we should be doing. Bomb-throwers are a bad idea in national politics. Reagan wasn't a bomb-thrower in 1980! ("Communism is evil" wasn't a bomb for the American voting public, only for the bien-pensant ultra-minority in the liberal/academic establishment, so don't even try floating that one.) We need guys who talk a nice, squishy, friendly, inclusive, non-threatening game...and then immediately pursue very partisan ends.

Basically, give me Scott Walker.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 12:35 PM (n/+FT)

64 What happens if this bill doesn't pass? Feline/canine miscegenation. Like the last two weeks.

Posted by: American troops at October 16, 2013 12:35 PM (QF8uk)

65 Ace - Barry is as batshit crazy as the rest, and his rhetoric is just as strong. "Get in their face" ring a bell ?

Posted by: ScoggDog at October 16, 2013 12:35 PM (Ur1ma)

66 Re: Needing a herd. This is not *entirely* untrue, but there is also a short refutation available: Breitbart. Mind you that answer is more complicated than it looks, a lot more experience and knowledge goes into "being Breitbart" than just courage, though that's a key factor. But there's your lone wolf that moved the needle.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s][/u] at October 16, 2013 12:36 PM (qyfb5)

67 After 2012, we lost our shot at taking down Obamacare. Talking about a "hill to die on" means nothing if you don't have possession of a tactically useful hill to begin with.

Getting rid of Obamacare requires Obama's signature. It will never happen.

I'm sorry, it is that simple.

Posted by: The Governor at October 16, 2013 12:37 PM (Tlix5)

We ended up with Obamacare because the democrats had a plan and we didn't.

Now that that is settled, we're moving on to immigration.

The democrats have and plan and we don't.

Anyone what to bet who is going to win?

Posted by: jwest at October 16, 2013 12:37 PM (u2a4R)

69 I'm eating Apple Jacks right now

Please don't hate!

Posted by: kbdabear at October 16, 2013 12:37 PM (aTXUx)

http://tinyurl.com/oydszjt

Even Jamie fucking Dimon admits that collapse is inevitable. Never thought I would live to see a bankster prick say that out loud.

Posted by: Larsen E. Whipsnade at October 16, 2013 12:37 PM (rXcBX)

71 Ace be hittin' alotta nails on de head today.

Posted by: maddogg at October 16, 2013 12:37 PM (xWW96)

72 I doubt very few people fighting for it even knows what it means and what it does to the poor working slobs in Congress. But it becomes a hill to die on.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 16, 2013 04:32 PM (f9c2L)

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

Grab your ankles, Chi-Town. Once people start noticing you government pukes aren't paying anything, there'll be hell to pay.

Posted by: Soona at October 16, 2013 12:38 PM (3Mz5/)

73 And note.... that if the German Government had not gone down the Green Energy road, their economy would be doing even better...

Posted by: Romeo13 at October 16, 2013 04:20 PM (lZBBB)

Also, lets not forget about Wisconisin. Scott Walker has transformed the state into a model of what cam be against a tide of nationwide wave of socialism.

GOP/TP/Reps need to hold up Wisconsin, Texas the Dakota's as examples of whats possible. They need to push the brand. Bejeeze this NOT brain scientology.

Posted by: dananjcon at October 16, 2013 12:38 PM (wmU4G)

74 The really sad thing is, people who love nothing more than to simply shit on everyone else not only are *clinically* unaware of what they're doing, they think they're welcome *everywhere*. No matter where you go, there's an asshole.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s][/u] at October 16, 2013 12:38 PM (qyfb5)

75 What happens if this bill doesn't pass? Streams cross & we divide by zero...

Posted by: rickb223 at October 16, 2013 12:38 PM (p9JxP)

76 I doubt very few people fighting for it even knows what it means and what it does to the poor working slobs in Congress. ??? The working poor in Congress?? Are they better than the workign poor elsewhere?

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 12:38 PM (UbDLm)

77 How hard is it for a politician to say 'Folks, we're broke. We have no geld. The well is dry. All that nice stuff you want from the government? You can't have it. We.are.broke.'?

Posted by: toby928© at October 16, 2013 12:38 PM (QupBk)

78 >>But in fact the left lies-- they are always claiming that socialism is actually "common sense centrism," obviously. They've been amazingly successful at doing this. It never ceases to amaze me how they, with the help of their allies in the media, have been able to portray themselves and their policies as centrist and people who push policies that favor our Constitution and traditional way of life as extremists.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 16, 2013 12:38 PM (g1DWB)

79 What really burns my ass is that after all the mudslinging from Republicans such as Peter King and Kelly Ayotte, they gained absolutely nothing from it. In fact, by not keeping their stupid fat mouths shut, they not dinged their colleagues and their own party, they hurt themselves. Today, as we begin the post-mortem, Everyone in the GOP took a hit looks bad, thanks mostly to Republicans. Fuck these idiots.

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 12:38 PM (U/ZJP)

80 62 What happens if this bill doesn't pass? Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 04:35 PM (CMlD4) It will pass, but we will have the same sort of threads come January, February or March. This whole thing is nothing more than the game, kick the can. And so it goes & goes & goes"..............

Posted by: Misanthropic humanitarian, now with 50% more sensitivity at October 16, 2013 12:38 PM (HVff2)

81 I think there's not just an indifference among the Tea Party to Scare the Bear stuff (that is, stuff that will provoke/upset the slumbering American dunces) but an actual affirmative desire to Scare the Bear. Posted by: ace at October 16, 2013 04:27 PM (/IWYB) As the old joke goes, "If you can still smile, you just don't understand the situation. " Math is coming for millions of our heads.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 12:38 PM (bb5+k)

82 Speaking of austerity, what's up with Jimmy Pethokoukis? I noticed that in the past year he's written, I think, 2 pieces praising Ben Bernanke. Then he was blasting the R's for supporting the Vitter amendment, now he's blasting Thomas Sowell for criticizing Yellen. I guess it's a Wall Street thing but at this stage, can't the conservatives get some dang economists on their side?

Posted by: jeannebodine at October 16, 2013 12:38 PM (2LJqa)

Because I would submit there is literally only a sliver's worth of daylight between me, RINO grandee, and the Ultimate Teahhadist in terms of political goals. For god's sake, I'm markedly to your right.

Principles are things you don't countermand. What you have are goals or dreams similar to what a conservative has. Those are different than principles.

I trust no matter how unpopular, you would never vote for the destruction of Israel, or to abolish elections. Because it violates your principles.

The GOP needs to have a discussion about its principles - do we believe abortion is murder, or don't we? Do we believe increasing our debt is ruinous, or don't we? Do we believe the government is too large and powerful, or don't we?

What are we committed to? Because right now, it looks like nothing, except winning seats and a prophecy of fulfilling nebulous goals.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 16, 2013 12:39 PM (TpXEI)

84 {i] what it does to the poor working slobs in Congress. But it becomes a hill to die on.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry

What? and those slobs are better somehow then the food service contractors working in the same building who just got cut to 30hours a week and tossed into the Exchange?

Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 12:39 PM (CMlD4)

85 I'm hearing the charges against the Tea Party. Are there any actual examples?

Posted by: polynikes at October 16, 2013 12:39 PM (m2CN7)

What I saw was the Tea Party asserting itself as a faction within the Republican Party, and one that is passionate. Other factions do not like this and would like it to go away. It will not go away unless it goes of its own volition, so the other factions will have to deal with it, and that will eventually be realized.

When? Beats me, someone pretty clever will figure it out though and use that to leverage himself.

It's politics.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - Outrage Outlet is the Home of the Hostile Takeover at October 16, 2013 12:39 PM (hLRSq)

87 quixotic sock off

Posted by: Jones in CO at October 16, 2013 12:39 PM (8sCoq)

88 Being really pissed off and angry is a good motivator for the true believers, but not for the average, non-political types.

Posted by: brak at October 16, 2013 12:39 PM (M2qTM)

89 71 I'm eating Apple Jacks right now Please don't hate! Posted by: kbdabear at October 16, 2013 04:37 PM (aTXUx) Cfuking 1%er.

Posted by: Hanoverfist at October 16, 2013 12:40 PM (ecN6u)

90
We fought the good fight.

-John Boehner

Posted by: Doctor Fish at October 16, 2013 12:40 PM (pJF+c)

91 17. Posted by: kbdabear at October 16, 2013 04:26 PM (aTXUx) When elitism promotes its own purism? Houston, we have an inbred problem.

Posted by: panzernashorn at October 16, 2013 12:41 PM (MhA4j)

92 The Left gets it ... They have batshit crazy fighters at the top. We have a Drunk with a skin tone that rhymes with nothing. Posted by: ScoggDog at October 16, 2013 04:29 PM (kWzSH) For all those people who think that Republican Control of the House puts us in a too weak position to get a specific outcome, I would point out that Stubborn Harry Reid is just one man. Being stubborn while in a position of power can work, but apparently not for Republicans.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 12:41 PM (bb5+k)

93 Being really pissed off and angry is a good motivator for the true believers, but not for the average, non-political types. Posted by: brak at October 16, 2013 04:39 PM (M2qTM) well when the average non-political type has his health insurance premium double, his deductible triple and his co-pay double I think he might start to get motivated

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 12:41 PM (UbDLm)

94 91 71 I'm eating Apple Jacks right now Please don't hate! Posted by: kbdabear at October 16, 2013 04:37 PM (aTXUx) No stored, post dated Kaboom? You poor soul

Posted by: Misanthropic humanitarian, now with 50% more sensitivity at October 16, 2013 12:42 PM (HVff2)

95 How hard is it for a politician to say 'Folks, we're broke. We have no geld. The well is dry. All that nice stuff you want from the government? You can't have it. We.are.broke.'? Obviously extremely hard.

Posted by: rickb223 at October 16, 2013 12:42 PM (p9JxP)

96 >>>Grab your ankles, Chi-Town. Once people start noticing you government pukes aren't paying anything, there'll be hell to pay.

Yeah, but that's precisely the problem. The Vitter Amendment -- which I supported because fuck people who work in Capitol Hill on principle, even if a bunch are my friends -- really was an attempt to single out congressional staffers in a way that was truly worse than every other American. It's all because of a series of misconceptions about what the current state of the law is, how insurance works, how employers subsidies operate, etc. The result would have been an active discrimination against anyone working on the Hill unlike those experienced by anyone else in the country (not just government employees, but private sector workers as well): they already have to go on the exchanges, but they don't get the employer subsidies that everyone else in the country gets.

It's easy to demagogue it -- and I supported it! Knowing it was pure demagoguery! -- for the precise reason that your post makes clear: people don't understand what the real situation is and they couldn't give a fuck. Hell, the idea of singling out Congressional staffers for special abuse and torture actually appeals to a lot of people because as I said, fuck them. But that doesn't make it anymore perverse.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 12:42 PM (n/+FT)

97 The main thing I hope to get out of the Tea Party movement is Republican politicians who can unashamedly articular conservative principles because they actually believe them.

Posted by: 29Victor at October 16, 2013 12:42 PM (ES9R7)

98 what it does to the poor working slobs in Congress. But it becomes a hill to die on.

Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry

What? and those slobs are better somehow then the food service contractors working in the same building who just got cut to 30hours a week and tossed into the Exchange?

Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 04:39 PM (CMlD4)

I cry every night for the people who live at the center of power because their wealthy relatives pulled strings to get them jobs there. We must make sure they get taxpayer subsidies on a plan which is good enough for everybody else.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 16, 2013 12:42 PM (TpXEI)

99 What I hate is the 'Othering' that has been hung on the Tea Party, even by Republicans now. I'm starting to feel the Tea Party should embrace it, actually push to be an authentic, conservative wing long-term. Used to be, the plan was to come out and push for three electoral terms and then go home, go back to work again and live a normal life. Now I'm wondering if we're going to have to escalate to a (hopefully figurative) state of war against R and D. United, under Whittle-sim.

Posted by: Mark Andrew Edwards at October 16, 2013 12:42 PM (3Znbm)

100 Just reminds me of a little quip: We're the "meddling kids".

Posted by: AmishDude at October 16, 2013 12:43 PM (T0NGe)

101 Really Good analogy for the current crisis

EXPRESSIONS OF RAGE AND LOUD NOISES!

statement of weary resignation...

pithy parting shot.

Posted by: Jones in CO at October 16, 2013 12:43 PM (8sCoq)

102 95 Being really pissed off and angry is a good motivator for the true believers, but not for the average, non-political types. Posted by: brak at October 16, 2013 04:39 PM (M2qTM) well when the average non-political type has his health insurance premium double, his deductible triple and his co-pay double I think he might start to get motivated Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 04:41 PM (UbDLm) Or your EBT card.

Posted by: Hanoverfist at October 16, 2013 12:43 PM (ecN6u)

103 For all those people who think that Republican Control of the House puts us in a too weak position to get a specific outcome, I would point out that Stubborn Harry Reid is just one man. Being stubborn while in a position of power can work, but apparently not for Republicans. Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 04:41 PM (bb5+k) Yes out strategy sucked, but even then, if we had held out another 24-36 hours I firmly believe we would have extracted some concessions. But because of the squishes in the Senate and that senile old bastard from AZ, we fucked up again

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 12:44 PM (UbDLm)

104 Winning yet, conservatives?

Posted by: Brave, Brave Sir 4X4 Powerstroke at October 16, 2013 12:44 PM (LSJmV)

105 What a cool name I have

Posted by: Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry at October 16, 2013 12:44 PM (3aNC4)

106
I was just thinking something similar, what harm did the shutdown do? Nothing really, but its always worth the try.

I realize the other side will say, what good did the shutdown do? Sure nothing was gained, but not trying for fear of failing is quite un-American in my eyes.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 16, 2013 12:44 PM (N8z9m)

107 I don't know about "premature austerity." Let me note that the one large-economy Western nation which has come out rather well in this crisis is Germany, which is running a small, almost now wiped out, budget deficit, and also has fairly low unemployment. Agreed - "premature austerity" is an oxymoron. You should always be as austere as your circumstances dictate - and our circumstances dictate a more austere approach (unless you live in DC, apparently).

Posted by: RomneyBot Since 2007 at October 16, 2013 12:44 PM (4uMU0)

108 I surmised long ago the Tea Party is largely successful because they are engaged. Voters, especially for some reason Republicans, are largely apathetic and not engaged unless inspired or pushed towards engagement.

The Republicans in Congress do not inspire and are also mostly phlegmatic. You would think they would figure out that motivating people with principled, easily understood ideas would inspire them to vote and support the party.

That they have not, tells you everything you need to know about the terrible position Republicans find themselves in today. It also gives you a hint why there should never be any such thing as a career politician.

Posted by: Marcus at October 16, 2013 12:44 PM (GGCsk)

109 McConnell must feel pretty safe in '14 to pull these stunts in the past few days. Too bad; I'd love to see him go away.

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 12:44 PM (U/ZJP)

110 >How hard is it for a politician to say 'Folks, we're broke. We have no geld. The well is dry. All that nice stuff you want from the government? You can't have it. We.are.broke.'?

Pols who say that don't get re-elected. Pols who kick the can down the road get re-elected.

Posted by: Jones in CO at October 16, 2013 12:44 PM (8sCoq)

111 well when the average non-political type has his health insurance premium double, his deductible triple and his co-pay double I think he might start to get motivated true, but i wonder if they'll even remember that by 2016

Posted by: brak at October 16, 2013 12:45 PM (M2qTM)

112 "...sometimes (letÂ’s admit it) has a Â“reality problemÂ” and very often has a tactics/strategy problem."

I'm feeling reasonably well about what has happened. I reject the statement above. Because 404care wasn't repealed, doesn't mean the TP has a strategy or "reality problem". In fact it is the head in the sand Establishment that has the reality problem. They are short sighted in understanding what this has done to highlight the tyranny of the left, short sighted in undervaluing the raising of awareness this has done, and the short sightedness in simply showing they have a some fight still left in themselves.

Posted by: dogfish at October 16, 2013 12:45 PM (nsOJa)

113 You'll be happy to know that there exists a place for people like yourself- those who have difficult with simple, everyday reality.

True, they'll make you surrender your shoelaces when you enter, but they'll give you a nice padded hockey helmet for free.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at October 16, 2013 04:33 PM

I'm living my share of reality right now pal, and the GOP has no interest in at least trying to make the reality for us serfs outside the Beltway a little better.

But thanks for the snark pal, I'm sure the GOP has loads and loads of Meggie Mac's friends who'll gleefully join your club. No need for nutjobs like me who only want a less than overbearing government

Any other folks here with precarious support for your party you want to push off the curb?

Posted by: kbdabear at October 16, 2013 12:45 PM (aTXUx)

114 Conservatives ARE going to win in the end, or we shall make leftard victory more painful than their loss.

Posted by: maddogg at October 16, 2013 12:45 PM (xWW96)

115 I realize the other side will say, what good did the shutdown do? Sure nothing was gained, but not trying for fear of failing is quite un-American in my eyes.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 16, 2013 04:44 PM (N8z9m)

I would tell the otherside voters to remember that sentiment when Obamacare kicks in fully.

Posted by: polynikes at October 16, 2013 12:46 PM (m2CN7)

116 McConnell must feel pretty safe in '14 to pull these stunts in the past few days. Too bad; I'd love to see him go away.

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 04:44 PM (U/ZJP)

I suspect the Dems have agreed to go easy on him after he discovered they were recording him. They're gonna trot out a straw man so he doesn't make trouble.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 16, 2013 12:46 PM (TpXEI)

117
Reagan wasn't a bomb-thrower in 1980!
Posted by: Jeff B.

Yep, the white shoe wing of the party loved Dutch for the level headed don't rock the boat moderate he was.

Didn't try to stop him at any cost, first with Bush I in the primaries, then with John Anderson's 3rd party challenge in the general.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at October 16, 2013 12:46 PM (kdS6q)

118 Except, Jeff B., that it won't work. The reason it works for the Democrats to run as nice guys and then act relentlessly partisan is that the media, having chosen sides, happily goes along with the game. The media will destroy any Republican who tries to present as moderate without worrying about the actual policy intent, because they assume (project) that the partisan ruthlessness is already there, whether it is or not. See "Romney." This why I think the Cruz "fearless, courteous clarity" approach is the only one that stands a chance of getting through the filters.

Posted by: Piercello at October 16, 2013 12:46 PM (P4dpU)

119 but private sector workers as well): they already have to go on the exchanges, but they don't get the employer subsidies that everyone else in the country gets. That is utter and complete bullshit. You have no idea what your talking about. As more and more companies both cut hours and/or eliminate their own health plans, all those "private" workers will be dumped into the same exchanges WITHOUT anduy employer subsidies.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 12:46 PM (UbDLm)

120 >>>What? and those slobs are better somehow then the food service contractors working in the same building who just got cut to 30hours a week and tossed into the Exchange?

Congressional staffers were already forced onto the exchanges, before the OPM issued its controversial ruling. That was part of the Obamacare law, it remains part of the law now. It's part of the law tomorrow.

The part that is in dispute was the employer subsidy. In the private sector, if your employer forces you onto the exchange, he's required by law to give you a partial subsidy as well. But because of a drafting error in the original bill, Congressional staffers were both forced onto the exchange and DENIED the employer subsidy that all other Americans everywhere in the U.S. are allowed. Which is manifestly unfair, but again: try explaining this to people who barely understand the insurance market or how the new law works in the first place. And furthermore, there is a genuine thirst for blood in the country and people, frankly, like the idea of lynching Congressional staffers because we see them as the evil New Class. Hell, I kind of see them that way myself. Doesn't make me think it's any less inequitable, though. I just happen to be okay with that inequity because I'm terribly unsentimental about my politics.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 12:46 PM (n/+FT)

121 Yes out strategy sucked, but even then, if we had held out another 24-36 hours I firmly believe we would have extracted some concessions. But because of the squishes in the Senate and that senile old bastard from AZ, we fucked up again

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 04:44 PM (UbDLm)

You believe, huh? Based on what I would love to know. They could hold out forever, blame us with the media's help, and smash us at the next election.

Where was our leverage? You don't get concessions without leverage.

Posted by: The Governor at October 16, 2013 12:46 PM (Tlix5)

122 "36 No pressure, NJ voters, but if Lonegan doesn't win I'll hang myself." We fought the good fight, I the libertarian crackpot right winger and my left of center wife will be voting for him in a little over an hour, but I'd get that noose ready. I almost went to go vote yesterday, but then I remember it was today. I'm hoping a lot of Booker voters did the same, but then forgot, we might have a chance in that case.

Posted by: Dr. Shatterhand at October 16, 2013 12:47 PM (n/ogz)

123 you can do a lot with just the House. the Dem House ran over Reagan and the GOP Senate on spending.

Posted by: X at October 16, 2013 12:47 PM (KHo8t)

124 You should always be as austere as your circumstances dictate - and our circumstances dictate a more austere approach (unless you live in DC, apparently). Even in boom times, the government should always be painfully austere. IT'S.NOT.THEIR.MONEY.TO.SPEND.

Posted by: toby928© at October 16, 2013 12:47 PM (QupBk)

125 But you know you live in Bizzarro Universe when your nation's credit rating only goes down when it tries to curb its reckless, unsustainable debt-spending.

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 12:47 PM (U/ZJP)

126

Yep, the white shoe wing of the party loved Dutch for the level headed don't rock the boat moderate he was.

And Reagan never primaried an incumbent GOP president.

Nowadays, he'd be blamed for everything Carter did, because of his disloyalty! during the primary.

Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 16, 2013 12:48 PM (TpXEI)

127 I cry every night for the people who live at the center of power because their wealthy relatives pulled strings to get them jobs there.

I guarantee you the Sedexho contractors slinging hash in the cafeteria don't have any wealthy relatives; unless they are drug dealers.

Yeah, the Vitter amendment singled them out - but at least some of them get to read the bill first.

Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 12:48 PM (CMlD4)

128 I'm still trying to find examples of the Tea Party carrying out the actions for which they are accused of doing by their critics.

Posted by: polynikes at October 16, 2013 12:48 PM (m2CN7)

129 well when the average non-political type has his health insurance premium double, his deductible triple and his co-pay double I think he might start to get motivated

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 04:41 PM (UbDLm)

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

Not to mention the unmentioned taxes that'll be eating out more of their paycheck once January rolls around.

Posted by: Soona at October 16, 2013 12:48 PM (3Mz5/)

130
yes, yes, we must protect those poor poor silver spoon congressional aides, who are almost all under 26 AND could be on their parents insurance.

And if not under 26 would not be eligible for subsidies anyway because of their high income.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk at October 16, 2013 12:48 PM (N8z9m)

131 Ever watch a baseball manager argue with the ump and get ejected? It's done for effect to fire up his team. The short sightedness is in those claiming TP short sightedness.

Posted by: dogfish at October 16, 2013 12:49 PM (nsOJa)

132 Yeah, but that's precisely the problem. The Vitter Amendment -- which I supported because fuck people who work in Capitol Hill on principle, even if a bunch are my friends -- really was an attempt to single out congressional staffers in a way that was truly worse than every other American. ======= Ummm....what?!

Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami - GO CARDS!!! at October 16, 2013 12:49 PM (bCEmE)

133 I think we could have maybe lit a fire under some democrat asses if we had been able to hold out another day, AND steal a senate seat in NJ, but I feel like booker didn't even really need to campaign. "Legends" of his heroic's and I guess his stripper twitter followers will carry the day. We are fucked....

Posted by: Dr. Shatterhand at October 16, 2013 12:49 PM (n/ogz)

134 once we identify The Hill To Die On, sure
also there is no hill worth dying on

Posted by: Wealthy Secure Do-Nothing Republican Motherfuckers at October 16, 2013 04:32 PM (8sCoq)

Why is everybody so eager to die on a hill? If you die on a hill - like Custer - you have lost. What good is that? Pick a fight you can win.

Posted by: Mikey NTH - Outrage Outlet is the Home of the Hostile Takeover at October 16, 2013 12:49 PM (hLRSq)

135 I think the TP has been hugely successful: Obama and his minions mention them and demonize them at every opportunity. The Dims are scared of them!

Posted by: PJ at October 16, 2013 12:49 PM (ZWaLo)

136 We spend 140% of our revenues. Do you know what YOUR credit rating would be if you did that, year in, year out?

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 12:49 PM (U/ZJP)

137 >>>Didn't try to stop him at any cost, first with Bush I in the primaries, then with John Anderson's 3rd party challenge in the general.

G.H.W. Bush's legitimate opposition to Reagan in the primaries shouldn't be interpreted as anything other than what it was: another guy vying for the nomination. It's not heresy to have run against Saint Reagan in the primary, for god's sake.

And John Anderson's third party challenge wasn't an "establishment challenge." You may have noticed that John Anderson didn't win that many votes.

Besides, none of this has anything whatsoever to do with the way Reagan comported himself. Lots of people (on the Left especially) were freaking out about him, sure. But that's not because he was running around saying "I WILL NUKE RUSSIA BACK TO THE STONE AGE" and promising to repeal the Civil Rights Act. He wasn't. He ran an extremely cool, moderately-pitched campaign that didn't flinch from his positions but didn't emphasize all the least palatable parts either, and cleaned the fuck up.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 12:50 PM (n/+FT)

138 You believe, huh? Based on what I would love to know. They could hold out forever, blame us with the media's help, and smash us at the next election. Where was our leverage? You don't get concessions without leverage. Posted by: The Governor at October 16, 2013 04:46 PM (Tlix5) Yeah I do. Because when certain things stopped getting paid and out credit rating is down graded again, no matter what, it happened on obama's watch. And he knows that. He would have blinked. Of course now we will never know.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 12:50 PM (UbDLm)

139 I'm going to take a vacation from politipcslFor a couple weeks I wont talk about anything but movies and tittehs.

Posted by: steevy at October 16, 2013 12:50 PM (9XBK2)

140 No pressure, NJ voters, but if Lonegan doesn't win I'll hang myself. That did make me laugh Mr (^.)Moron, Don't hang yourself. You'd be missed.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at October 16, 2013 12:51 PM (a4Omg)

141 You fucked up, you trusted us!

Posted by: Otter McConnell at October 16, 2013 12:51 PM (LSJmV)

142 JeffB - what employer subsidies? I haven't seen word one of them mentioned in at least a half a dozen benefits meetings I've had in the last year with my brokers and accountants.

Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 12:51 PM (CMlD4)

143 >>I'm still trying to find examples of the Tea Party carrying out the actions for which they are accused of doing by their critics. What type of examples are you looking for? Things like Cruz's chief of staff saying Sen. Coburn was joining the "surrender caucus"?

Posted by: JackStraw at October 16, 2013 12:51 PM (g1DWB)

144 We really need to take the Senate and send Cruz and Lee reinforcements. Cantor, Ryan, Boner et. al have to face primaries. They're too willing to cave. Unwilling to stand and make the case.

Posted by: Iblis at October 16, 2013 12:52 PM (9221z)

145

I don't understand the argument that the staffers would be unfairly harmed by requiring them to participate in the ACA because the private sector has employers pay a portion of their insurance.

What about the private sector that do not have an employer pay a portion of their insurance? Why does a staffer get more consideration than that citizen?

Posted by: polynikes at October 16, 2013 12:52 PM (m2CN7)

146 Reagan wasn't a bomb-thrower in 1980!
Posted by: Jeff B.

Yep, the white shoe wing of the party loved Dutch for the level headed don't rock the boat moderate he was.

Didn't try to stop him at any cost, first with Bush I in the primaries, then with John Anderson's 3rd party challenge in the general.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at October 16, 2013 04:46 PM

"I'm paying for this microphone, Mr Green!"

- Ronald Reagan, Nashua NH, 2/23/80

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OO2_49TycdE

Posted by: kbdabear at October 16, 2013 12:52 PM (aTXUx)

147 We spend 140% of our revenues. Do you know what YOUR credit rating would be if you did that, year in, year out? Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 04:49 PM (U/ZJP) Hey man... it's like different than your own personal finances.... or something. That's what the liberals keep telling me anyway. I saw some jackass on facebook trying to tell me that the debt limit being reached actually meant we could keep borrowing with reckless abandon, it's the debt payments you see that we would no longer be authorized to make...they would be illegal! hence default! I don't think we can win against that kind of weapons grade stupid.

Posted by: Dr. Shatterhand at October 16, 2013 12:52 PM (n/ogz)

148 It can't be said enough, Math is a bitch. It cannot be swayed by the braying donkeys, feel good 'huggers, FSA, corrupt pols, or the ostrich repubs. Those ignoring its reality are the short-sighted ones.

Posted by: dogfish at October 16, 2013 12:52 PM (nsOJa)

149 JeffB - what employer subsidies? I haven't seen word one of them mentioned in at least a half a dozen benefits meetings I've had in the last year with my brokers and accountants. Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 04:51 PM (CMlD4) I never heard of that either. They will pay a fine but that will be thousands less than the premiums they would have to pay

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 12:53 PM (UbDLm)

150 Reagan wasn't a bomb-thrower in 1980!... We need guys who talk a nice, squishy, friendly, inclusive, non-threatening game...and then immediately pursue very partisan ends. Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 04:35 PM (n/+FT) Didn't Reagan also say "no one rallies to an uncertain trumpet. " ? Coning the voters into electing you is not only impossible with the MSM running interference, it isn't going to work if you get elected and attempt anything which might cause them pain. The fact is, they need pain, and lots of it. The Financial path is simply unsustainable and money has to stop flowing. The voters have to become grown ups at some point or the system is doomed anyways.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 12:53 PM (bb5+k)

151 Around the time I got near voting age, I started looking at my voting options and came to the conclusion that no one on the ballot represented my interests. So I stayed home. After this process repeated itself for years, I started going LIV. If either "choice" leads the the same conclusion, what is the point in supporting either one? Then I got pissed off and watched Democrats take a hard left turn. So my choice became status quo or hard left. I voted against hard left. Never actually voted "for" anything. The "middle of the road" or "LIV" crowd wants to support something. The flaw in the current political thinking is the same as the mistake several magazines made years ago. Several people decided to start magazines with 'something for everyone'. They failed. Why? Because it confused people and, no matter what, 70% of the magazine was of no interest to everyone. The "big tent" marketing approach fails every time it's tried. EVERY. TIME. The magazines that were successful were the ones that most accurately targeted a specific interests. Republicans haven't had a brand beyond "We're not Democrats" in decades. No one votes FOR a Republican. They vote against the hard left. On the other side- the left votes FOR Democrats. The harder left they go, the more successful they are. Why? Same reason as magazines. Back to LIVs. If you really don't have an interest in magazines, you buy the one that everyone else is buying because they're excited about it. Eventually, if you read it, you may start to become excited about it too. Magazines also knew this. That's why that came up with "free copy for friends" campaigns and such. Either the influence leaders would drag lemmings along so they could be part of the in crowd or the not-so-lemming types would get interested in a focused message and become new influence leaders. Short story: people act on things they support. They only act against something if it is to an enormous extreme that creates barriers to their interests. Pass a new tax- everyone comes out and loses their minds for a week... till it becomes normal. Once they can go back to status quo, they do. Unless they are rabid supporters of something. Protests die out quickly. Fan clubs last forever.

Posted by: Damiano the Economic Traitor at October 16, 2013 12:53 PM (j0wOO)

152 Posted by: Dr. Shatterhand at October 16, 2013 04:47 PM (n/ogz) That's actually good news if your left of center wife is voting for Lonegan. What made her decide to vote for him rather than Booker?

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at October 16, 2013 12:53 PM (a4Omg)

153 104 95 Being really pissed off and angry is a good motivator for the true believers, but not for the average, non-political types.
Posted by: brak at October 16, 2013 04:39 PM (M2qTM)

There's also a contingent of strong form LIBers (i.e. actively using gasoline and matches to assist the burn). But I've seen no evidence that there's any real support for this among GOP voters or even Tea Party voters. And this destroying-the-system talk is exactly the kind of thing that Scares the Bear.

Posted by: Mætenloch at October 16, 2013 12:53 PM (XkotV)

154 Where was our leverage? You don't get concessions without leverage. "My fellow Americans, We left 11 to 16 CR's on Hairy Palms desk. The fact the the Gov is still shut down is because Hairy Palms REFUSES to bring them up for a vote." Drops mic. Goes home...

Posted by: rickb223 at October 16, 2013 12:53 PM (p9JxP)

155 I don't understand the argument that the staffers would be unfairly harmed by requiring them to participate in the ACA because the private sector has employers pay a portion of their insurance. What about the private sector that do not have an employer pay a portion of their insurance? Why does a staffer get more consideration than that citizen? Posted by: polynikes at October 16, 2013 04:52 PM (m2CN7) Because they are Mandarins and we are carrying their sedans. Still looking for the vote totals for the vote to repeal the Grassley Amendment. Still looking. Oh. Wait. There they are, right there behind the GM bondholders.

Posted by: alexthechick - Commence drinking now. at October 16, 2013 12:54 PM (VtjlW)

156
And John Anderson's third party challenge wasn't an "establishment challenge."
Posted by: Jeff B.

If you weren't around to see it at the time, read up on how Anderson's run came to be and get back to us.

Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at October 16, 2013 12:54 PM (kdS6q)

157 >>>144 JeffB - what employer subsidies? I haven't seen word one of them mentioned in at least a half a dozen benefits meetings I've had in the last year with my brokers and accountants. in leftspeak the subsidy is the penaltax they don't have to pay if they provide insurance. like oil company subsidies.

Posted by: X at October 16, 2013 12:54 PM (KHo8t)

158 This why I think the Cruz "fearless, courteous clarity" approach is the only one that stands a chance of getting through the filters. Posted by: Piercello at October 16, 2013 04:46 PM (P4dpU) It always helps coming to the debate prepared with all of the facts to accomplish a DESIGNATED purpose. Nothing more pussy than a Republican who refuses to present a plan, repeating the mantra that he's not going to give away his strategy so that Democrats can shoot it down. HOW THE HELL ELSE are you going to get voters to support your plan if you have no plan? Obviously it isn't the Democrats he fears, but the ire and anger from his own Republican constituents who shoot down Washingtonian shared corrupt values. To hell with everyone so obtuse as to continue to repeat Pelosi's "gotta vote for it before you get to read it or find out what's in it".

Posted by: panzernashorn at October 16, 2013 12:54 PM (MhA4j)

159 Excuse me, Jeff B, but fuck the congressional staffers. I am out of work. My husband is out of work. Our individual health plan has been cancelled due to the ACA. Fuck the congressional staffers. If that makes me sound like an irrational tea-partiers, so be it.

Posted by: jeannebodine at October 16, 2013 12:54 PM (2LJqa)

160 67 Ace - Barry is as batshit crazy as the rest, and his rhetoric is just as strong. "Get in their face" ring a bell ? Posted by: ScoggDog at October 16, 2013 04:35 PM (Ur1ma) "If they bring a knife, we bring a gun."

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 12:54 PM (bb5+k)

161 The alignment of interests is all wrong for the governed. The first principles for all of these pricks is skewed toward getting elected and staying in office. It's not a secret. We'll scuffle a little around the edges, but further aggregation of power in Washington is the perpetual goal regardless of which party is in the majority. It would probably eventually be true even if the tea party were in charge. It's human nature.

Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at October 16, 2013 12:55 PM (+lsX1)

162

@98 The result would have been an active discrimination against anyone working on the Hill unlike those experienced by anyone else in the country (not just government employees, but private sector workers as well): they already have to go on the exchanges, but they don't get the employer subsidies that everyone else in the country gets.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 04:42 PM (n/+FT)

Interesting that CONGRESS didn't have any problem going behind closed doors after the fact and cutting a deal for themselves that exempted them from the very thing that they are FORCING on the rest of the country. Perhaps if they had stopped for a minute to think about how their vote for this abomination was going to affect their staffers, they wouldn't have passed the damn thing.

And how about the "active discrimination" being exercised by that bill towards everyone who makes above a certain salary? I'm sure those on the left don't see "discriminating against the rich" as a bad thing, but if they aren't careful, pretty soon they ARE going to be the rich.

Incidentally, there are LOTS of people who aren't going to be eligible for employer subsidies.

This "employer" isn't too happy about having to pay for Congressional subsidies, given that I don't have a choice about their work product. It's not like I get to hire and fire them - but they get to keep taking more and more money from my pocket to subsidize their lifestyle.

Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at October 16, 2013 12:55 PM (PZ6/M)

163 remember that genius Wiiliam Saletan said we can never go bankrupt... because the US can just print more money!!

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 12:55 PM (U/ZJP)

164 "I'm paying for this microphone, Mr Green!"

- Ronald Reagan, Nashua NH, 2/23/80

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OO2_49TycdE

Posted by: kbdabear at October 16, 2013 04:52 PM

That was a beautiful moment from a man who had BALLS. You could see the Establishment Country Club Republicans shitting their pants when the crowd exploded in cheers

Posted by: kbdabear at October 16, 2013 12:55 PM (aTXUx)

165 2 I need a vacation from this shit.

The government passes a law that exempts itself, and not a single fucking peep from anyone in a position to draw attention to it, outside the few who are now apparently double-plus ungood.

The government chases citizens out of national parks, and not a single fucking question is allowed to be asked that might draw attention to it, and not a single fucking swingin' dick steps up to say, "Fuck you."

The government weaponizes itself and goes after citizens who disagree with it, and the only thing the left deigns to say is that the "lousy teabaggers had it comin', being all dissenty" and shit.

The government gets caught spying on the whole fucking world, and we're all just OK with it, cause a few news cycles have gone by.

Fuck me.

But you're right, ace. Time to survive.

Posted by: My Sharia Moor at October 16, 2013 12:55 PM (0duDc)

166 What type of examples are you looking for? Things like Cruz's chief of staff saying Sen. Coburn was joining the "surrender caucus"?

Posted by: JackStraw at October 16, 2013 04:51 PM (g1DWB)

Did the wackobird have his little feelings hurt? No, I'm not talking about verbal tit for tat. I'm talking about not compromising or having the heard mentality of not thinking about things?

Posted by: polynikes at October 16, 2013 12:55 PM (m2CN7)

167 >>>JeffB - what employer subsidies? I haven't seen word one of them mentioned in at least a half a dozen benefits meetings I've had in the last year with my brokers and accountants.

Here you go, Jean. A good article from National Review that explains it: http://t.co/m0WvWCRTFf

Incidentally, if you follow Ace on Twitter, he's in agreement with me as well. Initially thought it was just a "New Class exemption" like I'm sure most of you do, but did some research and found out that, no...it actually is kind of a brutal fucking over of Hill staffers and nobody else.

Which, as I said, I was on board with because I recognize that they make a convenient target for political lynching that can unite the country. But I'm under no illusions as to what it would have been.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 12:55 PM (n/+FT)

168 Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 04:50 PM (UbDLm)

I take it nothing bad happened during the first 4 years on Obama's watch? Also, he'll be running for reelection and even cares if bad things happen on his watch? He'll never sign a repeal of his signature legislation. Ever.

You have no leverage. Ergo, you get no concessions.

Posted by: The Governor at October 16, 2013 12:55 PM (Tlix5)

169 Nevegiveup, The fine was silly, it wouldn't have even been 10% of the cost of coverage, it didn't even enter into the discussion. The only issue was retention and hiring. And, not being able to get an answer on what to do with the Tri-care supplemental plans.

Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 12:55 PM (CMlD4)

170 Oh. Wait. There they are, right there behind the GM bondholders. ...who are sitting at the counter at the Shovel Ready CafeÂ™

Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/s][/u][/b] at October 16, 2013 12:56 PM (yz6yg)

171 "Herd Conventional Wisdom" is running this country right now, and is easily manipulated by the Media. This is how we have suddenly decided that if a guy calls himself a girl, he is a girl. E.G. Bradley Manning decides he wants to be Chelsea Manning. Notice how the media react-they just start calling him "her". Notice how a bunch of freaky perverts are now called "Gay Activists" and people are acting like it's Selma Alabama 1965. It's not preaching or telling people what to do, it is just showing by example what is "normal". Hell, there is even a sitcom called "The New Normal"! And of course there is a "gay couple" ( two homosexuals) in it. So the average idiot who is never sure of anything says " hmm, I must be the only one who thinks this is weird". I don't think the Elite Rulers have quite realized the immense power they have. Yet.

Posted by: Pollyanna's pessimistic papa at October 16, 2013 12:56 PM (tB0Ek)

172 Getting rid of Obamacare requires Obama's signature. It will never happen. I'm sorry, it is that simple. Posted by: The Governor at October 16, 2013 04:37 PM (Tlix5) Nope. It only requires a stubborn house. Nothing gets funded without House approval. NOTHING. FUCK Obama's signature. Fuck Harry Reid. The HOUSE controls the purse strings. We had a winning hand, and Boener pitched it.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 12:56 PM (bb5+k)

173 "Let me note that the one large-economy Western nation which has come out rather well in this crisis is Germany, which is running a small, almost now wiped out, budget deficit, and also has fairly low unemployment."

Let it also be noted that Germany has been prospering via the euro mechanism.

Before the euro, Germans had to compete with local neighbors such as the Mediterranean bloc, e.g. Italy, which could always artificially prop up their competitiveness by devaluing their currencies versus the deutschemark.

The single currency closed that door. And it turns out that many of the Club Med economies and businesses had gotten hooked on the use of tactical devaluations, and just weren't able to compete against more efficient German firms once devaluation was off the table.

So, yes, Germany shows the salubrious effects of austerity, but it also shows that beggaring one's local competitors with a currency straitjacket can work well. The latter strategy is not one open to the USA.

Posted by: torquewrench at October 16, 2013 12:56 PM (gqT4g)

174 They sell a topical cream to stave off Premature Austerity nowadays?

Posted by: Jaws at October 16, 2013 12:57 PM (4I3Uo)

175 The "poor working slobs in Congress"?!?!?!?!?!!?!!? :eyeroll:

Let me ask you something. If having to submit to Zerocare is such a burden to those poor slobs, doesn't that mean it will be a burden to WE poor slobs? Why do we have to eat the shit sandwich and not them?

And they call us 'tards.

Posted by: Damn Sockpuppet at October 16, 2013 12:57 PM (YmPwQ)

176 Grover N., Mike Medved, National Review, Fox News etc... All Faux conservatives and RINO's

---

Grover N. said:

Grover Norquist isnÂ’t happy with the Defunders. The Americans for Tax Reform president told reporters today that they have a lot of apologies to make and bridges to re-build.

Â“ItÂ’d be a good idea if they stopped referring to other Republicans as Hitler appeasers because they opposed the strategy they put forward which failed,Â” Norquist says. Â“I think if you make a mistake as big as what they did, you owe your fellow senators and congressmen a big apology Â— and your constituents, as well, because nothing they did advanced the cause of repealing or dismantling Obamacare.Â”

Posted by: WalrusRex at October 16, 2013 12:57 PM (Hx5uv)

177 Â… really was an attempt to single out congressional staffers in a way that was truly worse than every other American. This would only be true if congressional staffer pay is being reduced to pay for their subsidy. Private-sector workers do not get a subsidy from their employers for health care. What they get are (a) reduced wages, (b) fewer jobs, and/or (c) a lower quality product, further putting pressure on (a) and (b).

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at October 16, 2013 12:58 PM (QF8uk)

178

Here's my upbeat assessment.

(1) Dems claim this as an Obama win and run around telling everyone so;

(2) Ted Cruz failed to end Obamacare or force a vote on Obamacare;

(3) most Americans didn't follow this closely but will remember moar debt = Obama win, Ted Cruz = against moar debt and Obamacare.

Then there is the cold reality of Obamacare and moar debt as we approach the 2014 elections. Somehow I don't think this all adds up to a Dems win = moar debt and Obamacare.

This outlook could change wildly if there is a real economic revival and everyone likes paying for Obamacare. What are the odds?

Posted by: Chaos, it the other dark meat at October 16, 2013 12:58 PM (oDCMR)

179 "That's actually good news if your left of center wife is voting for Lonegan. What made her decide to vote for him rather than Booker? Posted by: FenelonSpoke " She is not stupid, and realizes I think that he is an empty suit, and the cult of personality built around him is a complete fraud, and comical. I pontificate about politics to anyone who will listen all day long, but I don't tell her who to vote for or what to do, I'm pretty sure even though she is more towards the liberal side of the spectrum that she has voted along similar lines to me since we've been married. I don't generally even ask her who she voted for though. She is not registered to any party, and I am probably joining her as an independent. I've had it with the GOP. I stay with them to vote in primaries, but I honestly don't care anymore who the nominate in NJ.

Posted by: Dr. Shatterhand at October 16, 2013 12:58 PM (n/ogz)

180 So, yes, Germany shows the salubrious effects of austerity, but it also shows that beggaring one's local competitors with a currency straitjacket can work well. The latter strategy is not one open to the USA. Nor is underfunding your military due to your lack of international commitments. Oh, wait.....

Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/s][/u][/b] at October 16, 2013 12:58 PM (yz6yg)

181 Some of you need to look at it this way: Why would a non-Republican voter ever consider voting for a Republican when Republicans don't even stand up for what they believe in? What DO the Republicans believe in, btw?

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 12:58 PM (U/ZJP)

182 JeffB - what employer subsidies? I haven't seen word one of them mentioned in at least a half a dozen benefits meetings I've had in the last year with my brokers and accountants.

Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 04:51 PM (CMlD4)

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

JeffB also left out what is becoming a very large segment of this country which is the part-time worker who'll have to pay the whole amount. I'm blessed with being in a company that partially pays for my health insurance. A 5% subsidy. The rate that I pay went up 125% this year.

Hey, JeffB. What's the percent subsidy government goons are getting?

Posted by: Soona at October 16, 2013 12:59 PM (3Mz5/)

183 Trust But Verify is old school. Verify. Accountability.

Posted by: panzernashorn at October 16, 2013 12:59 PM (MhA4j)

184 Here's the thing: nobody feels sorry for Congressional staffers. It's like asking people to feel pity for pedophiles. Or cockroaches. Our first instinct is to SQUASH THEM, SQUASH 'EM GOOD!

I feel the same way. Hey, I'm in touch with my hatreds, I'll own up to it. I find the idea of gratuitously hurting people merely because they belong to the political class to be very appealing.

It just isn't very equitable. And if I were a better Christian or human I would be opposed. As it is, I sit here knowing that the Vitter Amendment would have been unfair to this select group of people (Congressional staffers) and also thinking "fuck fairness, let's string some people from lampposts."

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 12:59 PM (n/+FT)

185 >>Did the wackobird have his little feelings hurt? No, I'm not talking about verbal tit for tat. I'm talking about not compromising or having the heard mentality of not thinking about things? How about threatening to primary anyone who doesn't toe the Tea Party line? That doesn't seem like compromising to me. The fact is that both the establishment and the Tea Party take shots at each other and don't compromise with each other. Neither side is pure. I'd like to see both sides stop swinging at each other and remember the real problem is on the other side.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 16, 2013 12:59 PM (g1DWB)

186 He'll never sign a repeal of his signature legislation. Ever. You have no leverage. Ergo, you get no concessions. Posted by: The Governor at October 16, 2013 04:55 Who said anything about repeal? I did not, and neither was this fight about that. It was about delaying the individual mandate, which still may happen if they don't get those sites up and running, or the Vitter Amendment, or the Medical Device tax. Problem was we never decided on a strategy and stuck to it. we flopped around like a fish stuck on land

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 01:00 PM (UbDLm)

187 >>>This would only be true if congressional staffer pay is being reduced to pay for their subsidy.

That is exactly what would have happened absent the OPM ruling.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 01:00 PM (n/+FT)

188 JeffB - I understand all that, but what is this "employer subsidy"? Are you referring to the magical unicorn skittles I get to pass down to my employees because I saved money by kicking them into the exchange? HaHa, the only employees getting kicked into the exchange are going to be those you don't care about retaining or replacing - so no sheckles for you. The Whole Foods example is cute, but if you think that gratuity is going to be widely repeated, I suggest you switch to different whiskey.

Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 01:01 PM (CMlD4)

189

A small counterpoint. I recall the screams of criticism from the media back in 2005 about how minority leaders Reid and Pelosi were trying every parlimentary trick in the book to try and derail the GOP.

Oh, wait - that never happened.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at October 16, 2013 01:01 PM (79zi+)

190 175. Mark Levin last night, Obama means to usurp the power of the purse by revisionist policy, abusing by executive order Constitution Article 1.

Posted by: panzernashorn at October 16, 2013 01:01 PM (MhA4j)

191 BBCA just started Cleopatra starring Elizabeth Taylor. Catch everyone later, time for bread and circuses.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at October 16, 2013 01:01 PM (bfAee)

192 We really need to take the Senate and send Cruz and Lee reinforcements. *** there are a few god ones there now. Jeff Sessions has been fantastic as have been Louie Gohmert and Steve Stockman. This past three weeks I've also become acquainted with Pete Sessions and Virginia Foxx and each has made an impression on me. Rand has also been pretty good. There are others who escape me at the moment. I just hope that when folks take to the voting booth to kick the bums out of Congress they have paid enough attention to recognize friend from foe.

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at October 16, 2013 01:02 PM (DmNpO)

193 uh... good ones

Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at October 16, 2013 01:02 PM (DmNpO)

194

18The Tea Party needs some big Senate RINO scalps in the 2014 Primaries, to move forward

---

But i am willing to settle for some big Senate Democrat scalps...

Posted by: Buzzsaw90 at October 16, 2013 01:02 PM (SO2Q8)

195 What are we committed to? Because right now, it looks like nothing, except winning seats and a prophecy of fulfilling nebulous goals. Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 16, 2013 04:39 PM (TpXEI) Agree with your assessment.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 01:02 PM (bb5+k)

196 FUCK Obama's signature. Fuck Harry Reid. The HOUSE controls the purse strings.

This does seem to get forgotten. ALOT.

Posted by: dogfish at October 16, 2013 01:03 PM (nsOJa)

197

>>"It is also true that the Tea Party promotes some bad policies like premature austerity,"

What the hell does that mean? Shouldn't it be "belated austerity"?

Posted by: rrpjr at October 16, 2013 01:03 PM (4IjeF)

198 If obamacare is so good all the Congress, Everyone in the Executive, All the Staffers in Congress, and everyone from every cabinet department should be clamoring to get on board. But we all know the truth and not amount of sugar coating can disguise the rancid smell from this abomination

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 01:03 PM (UbDLm)

199

Grover can go buzz off. Another guy pushing for amnesty. Nothing but a corporatist shill.

Posted by: tofer732 at October 16, 2013 01:03 PM (z3MpN)

200 And if we reduce our debt-spending from 140% to 139.8%, it's considered a drastic droconian cut. /letters from Bizzarro Universe

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 01:03 PM (U/ZJP)

201 and screwing over the staff in Congress does have a positive effect - maybe they will spend a bit more time reading the shit they shovel and less time chasing skirts.

Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 01:03 PM (CMlD4)

202 Look, it's not really a big deal: I favored the Vitter Amendment! I want to fuck people merely for working for Congress right now. I don't like people who aspire to be part of the permanent political class.

I just recognize that this is what we would have been doing here. And I'm perfectly okay with that.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 01:03 PM (n/+FT)

203 Nevergiveup - dont forget the scotus and their staff

Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 01:04 PM (CMlD4)

204 and screwing over the staff in Congress does have a positive effect - maybe they will spend a bit more time reading the shit they shovel and less time chasing skirts. Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 05:03 PM (CMlD4) Exactly

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 01:04 PM (UbDLm)

205 >>>and screwing over the staff in Congress does have a positive effect - maybe they will spend a bit more time reading the shit they shovel and less time chasing skirts.

Yes, but a downside is that these sorts of jobs will become even more the exclusive province of the very rich and well-connected. Like unpaid internships in the fashion industry in NYC: only daddy's money allows that to happen.

I'm not sure that's something we want.

Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 01:04 PM (n/+FT)

206 The HOUSE controls the purse strings.

Not anymore.

Posted by: DaveA at October 16, 2013 01:05 PM (DL2i+)

207 Don't worry, we've positioned ourselves as a stone-cold lock for the 2024 elections. Because 38-dimensional chess.

Posted by: Your GOP Betters at October 16, 2013 01:05 PM (vH4YP)

208 I just recognize that this is what we would have been doing here. And I'm perfectly okay with that. Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 05:03 PM (n/+FT) they are not getting fucked over anymore than anyone else out there.

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 01:05 PM (UbDLm)

209 How about threatening to primary anyone who doesn't toe the Tea Party line? That doesn't seem like compromising to me.

The fact is that both the establishment and the Tea Party take shots at each other and don't compromise with each other. Neither side is pure.

I'd like to see both sides stop swinging at each other and remember the real problem is on the other side. Posted by: JackStraw at October 16, 2013 04:59 PM

Who IS the other side? It feels kind of lonely on this side of the line

And since when does elective office make one immune from primaries? I'd like every last one of those House of Lords to worry about it even if it isn't there right now

Posted by: kbdabear at October 16, 2013 01:06 PM (aTXUx)

210 And NJ-don't go out and hang yourself if Booker wins. :^) You probably know-living in NJ-that we haven't had a Republican Senator in decades and Lonegan has been outspent 10:1 or more. So it wouldn't be a surprise. Booker will reliably vote D on everything but it's no different than it would have been with Lautenberg in there. It would be great if Lonegean wins, but if he doesn't you just pick up yourself and have the choice of fighting or giving up. Lonegan can be very proud of his hard work in running and sticking to his principles. He will go back to a family that loves him (he doesn't have to tweet strippers) and his business which employs almost 100 people or more. Booker if he wins will be the Jr, Senator from NJ and will get no particular respect from Menendez. I certainly wish Booker a happy life, but things came out during this campaign that dimmed his lustre Whatever happens, keep up the good fight.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at October 16, 2013 01:06 PM (a4Omg)

211 Hell, the idea of singling out Congressional staffers for special abuse and torture actually appeals to a lot of people because as I said, fuck them. But that doesn't make it anymore perverse. Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 04:42 PM (n/+FT) You mean to say there is no UPSIDE to pissing off the people who see Congressmen every day and might put a bug in their ear?

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 01:06 PM (bb5+k)

212 I'd also like a definition of premature austerity. Given that we are at a one-to-one debt to GDP ratio, I don't see anything premature about it, and the one thing we need now is austerity, when the federal government is borrowing or printing over 40% of the money it spends.

Posted by: Vashta Nerada at October 16, 2013 01:06 PM (79zi+)

213 And if we reduce our debt-spending from 140% to 139.8%, it's considered a drastic droconian cut. No, thatÂ’s an impossible cut. Increasing by 6.8% instead of by 7%, thatÂ’s a drastic draconian cut.

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at October 16, 2013 01:06 PM (QF8uk)

214 The House holds obama's purse.

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 01:06 PM (U/ZJP)

215

Can anyone recommend any books that explore the economics/fiscal policy after WWII when there was massive austerity followed by a short term recession and then an economic boom.

If you cut taxes by the amount you cut spending this economy would take off in my opinion (deregualtion, drilling on federal land, etc)

Posted by: bobbymike at October 16, 2013 01:06 PM (9trNv)

216 Did the wackobird have his little feelings hurt? No, I'm not talking about verbal tit for tat. I'm talking about not compromising or having the heard mentality of not thinking about things?

May I interest you in a boiling cauldron today? Barely used.

Posted by: Christine O'Donnell at October 16, 2013 01:06 PM (SY2Kh)

217 ...while obama shops.

Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 01:07 PM (U/ZJP)

218 At least this RINO has an amusing analogy. It's batshit crazy but you can't have everything.

When Republican strategist Alex Castellanos compared Sen. Ted CruzÂ’s (R-Texas) shutdown strategy to Â“bunny sex,Â” CNNÂ’s Anderson Cooper had to ask him if he was stoned.
GOP Strategists Bizarre Ted Cruz Attack Makes Anderson Cooper Ask: Are You High?

Â“A friend explained to me today, finally, what Ted Cruz is doing,Â” Castellanos said Monday. Â“And I finally understand: HeÂ’s having bunny sex.Â”

In an attempt to dampen the awkwardness of the bizarre statement, Cooper joked: Â“This is the late-night edition of Â’360.Â’Â”

Rather than blowing past the comment, Castellanos actually tried to explain his logic.

Â“In nature, there are boom-and-bust cycles. The snowshoe hare, every 10 years, multiplies sixfold,Â” he explained.

Â“Are you high?Â” a stunned Cooper replied.

Â“IÂ’m high. Totally high. Let me explain. I wish I was,Â” Castellanos joked. Â“The snowshoe hare Â— I thought itÂ’s a marvelous explanation Â— every 10 years, multiplies sixfold. Bunnies like sex apparently. But the boom produces a bust. They press their food supply, they invite predators. Right now, Ted Cruz, whatÂ’s heÂ’s doing, feels good. HeÂ’s growing his supporters. HeÂ’s leading the Republican Party, I think, into a bust.Â”

Â“I think youÂ’re digging a ditch, Alex,Â” Cooper said.

As the segment came to an end, Cooper was still confused about the Â“bunny sexÂ” analogy.

Â“WeÂ’ll have a man-to-man talk later,Â” Castellanos said.

Posted by: WalrusRex at October 16, 2013 01:07 PM (Hx5uv)

219 "premature austerity."

Isn't there a pill for that nowadays?

Posted by: Dr. Varno at October 16, 2013 01:07 PM (bYRF2)

220 And let's be honest we are our worst enemies. If that Heritage Letter did not come out last night the House might have passed a deeply flawed proposal but still a much better one than we are dealing with today. Our inter fighting fucked as worse than anything the Dems did to us. Shit I expect it from the enemy, not so much from our friends

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 01:07 PM (UbDLm)

221 Nope. It only requires a stubborn house. Nothing gets funded without House approval. NOTHING.
FUCK Obama's signature. Fuck Harry Reid. The HOUSE controls the purse strings.
We had a winning hand, and Boener pitched it.
Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 04:56 PM (bb5+k)

Um I'm gonna have to ask to see your work between steps 1 and 4.

Or perhaps you're using the term 'winning' Charlie Sheen-style.

Posted by: Mætenloch at October 16, 2013 01:07 PM (XkotV)

222

190>>> This would only be true if congressional staffer pay is being reduced to pay for their subsidy.

That is exactly what would have happened absent the OPM ruling.

You know those subsidies should be taxable as income. At least this is what Obama and his folks think about such things. Lets put it to a vote.

Posted by: Chaos, it the other dark meat at October 16, 2013 01:07 PM (oDCMR)

223 And Reagannever primaried an incumbent GOP president.

Nowadays, he'd be blamed for everything Carter did, because of his disloyalty! during the primary. Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at October 16, 2013 04:48 PM

Then who was that Hollywood guy running against me in 1976?

Posted by: Gerald Ford at October 16, 2013 01:07 PM (aTXUx)

224

Posted by: WalrusRex at October 16, 2013 04:57 PM (Hx5uv)

First I would like a cite on who called someone a Hitler appeasers. Second, guess who is going to be on the pro immigration reform front. That's right, the supporter of the 9/11 mosque, Grover Norquist.

Posted by: polynikes at October 16, 2013 01:08 PM (m2CN7)

225 Yes out strategy sucked, but even then, if we had held out another 24-36 hours I firmly believe we would have extracted some concessions. But because of the squishes in the Senate and that senile old bastard from AZ, we fucked up again Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 04:44 PM (UbDLm) We should have put our foot down in 2010. As Gandalf said: "You shall not pass."

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 01:08 PM (bb5+k)

226

"The problem is that this country is running untenable deficits.

That's the reality.

The "problem" is that Liberal America doesn't recognize the problem."

_______

What's worse is that the GOPe recognizes the problem but is willing to go along with continuing down the path of financial decline and eventual collapse.

Posted by: Meremortal at October 16, 2013 01:09 PM (1Y+hH)

227 Premature austerity? Having your investment portfolio, financial accounts and property seized by the federal government. That's the IRS enforcing Obamacide. Already there with that "law of the land". Redistributing poverty more efficiently, premature austerity via de Fault. There is no "premature austerity" Tea Party agenda. Just FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY.

Posted by: panzernashorn at October 16, 2013 01:09 PM (MhA4j)

228 "Wrong. Titanic's officers at least took the hit themselves and aided the passengers. Our ship of state is the Concordia. The officers ran it into rocks and are shoving the passengers aside to save themselves first"

That's a frankly brilliant metaphor that deserves to be remembered and repeated.

Posted by: torquewrench at October 16, 2013 01:09 PM (gqT4g)

229 We should have put our foot down in 2010. As Gandalf said: "You shall not pass." Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 05:08 PM (bb5+k) should have, would have, could have And if a bull had tits

Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 01:09 PM (UbDLm)

230 And NJ-don't go out and hang yourself if Booker wins.

***

I think it would be nice if Booker wins. He and Lieawatha can lie to each other.

Posted by: WalrusRex at October 16, 2013 01:09 PM (Hx5uv)

231 That is exactly what would have happened absent the OPM ruling. So, they would have been treated like any other private-sector worker, but then the OPM ruling made them special?

Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at October 16, 2013 01:09 PM (QF8uk)

232 Pols who say that don't get re-elected. Pols who kick the can down the road get re-elected. Posted by: Jones in CO at October 16, 2013 04:44 PM (8sCoq) One more piece of evidence that reality is becoming increasingly in conflict with Democracy. Reality is going to win the contest.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 01:10 PM (bb5+k)

233 Hubby just talked to his insurance benefits department. He knew we were in trouble when the operator said that there have been a few changes. We will now have a $12, 000 deductible. $3, 000 deductible for individual members. May every Democrat who voted for this rot in the hottest ring of hell.

Posted by: jmel at October 16, 2013 01:10 PM (J66+F)

234 the reason the GOP House has to fold is the same reason the GOP Senate and Reagan had to fold in 80's. fear of being called mean.

Posted by: X at October 16, 2013 01:10 PM (KHo8t)

235 Shit I expect it from the enemy, not so much from our friends Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 05:07 PM (UbDLm) By this point you should be expecting it from both. Because people are pretty stupid. Frankly it is not hard to understand why people question the motives of their fellows, given the crass and vile nature of some of the "advice" given. It's counterproductive, but easy to understand.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's Other Mobile[/i][/b][/s][/u] at October 16, 2013 01:10 PM (qyfb5)

236 As far as the staffers go, screw 'em. My wife and I have been paying ever-higher percentages of her employer-provided healthcare insurance. Why should they be immune to it? I think that Dennis Miller put it best when he said TFG could have ensured democrat presidencies from here till eternity if he made a big show of being the first one to sign up for the exchanges. But that's not what he wants. He wants to do us all in the starfish, and they're going to have D presidents forever anyway, because they'll protect the entitlement state from the meanie Rs.

Posted by: jakeman at October 16, 2013 01:11 PM (vH4YP)

237 Posted by: WalrusRex at October 16, 2013 05:09 PM (Hx5uv) Yes, they can tell little yarns to each other. However, I don't think Booker has to try to pass himself off as a faux Indian. They might be running against each other for an upcoming Pres, election

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at October 16, 2013 01:11 PM (a4Omg)

238

the GOP is dead, it sold it's soul for trinkets and beads and now it's just an old, used-up whore.

the GOP doesn't deserve my vote or the vote of anyone who loves limited, decentralized government, the GOP no longer stands for those things and doesn't want the people who still believes in them.

ok great, let's see if they ever win another national election without people like me.

Posted by: Shoey at October 16, 2013 01:12 PM (jdOk/)

239 White House: 'There are no winners here' We're all whiners. /recall Obama as CinC: I'm not interested in victory.

Posted by: panzernashorn at October 16, 2013 01:13 PM (MhA4j)

240 125 you can do a lot with just the House. the Dem House ran over Reagan and the GOP Senate on spending. Posted by: X at October 16, 2013 04:47 PM (KHo8t) Exactly the point I was trying to make. The HOUSE is where much of the real power is.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 01:13 PM (bb5+k)

241 the let it burn is dead

Posted by: akak at October 16, 2013 01:13 PM (4tkxZ)

242 My take on all this is that this was the political equivalent of the Doolittle raid. Militarily, it was a catastrophe. We lost planes and pilots we couldn't afford, and risked valuable military assets we couldn't replace (aircraft carriers), not to mention a 1/4M dead allies (the Chinese). All for a militarily insignificant raid on a few Japanese factories.

However.

The country was in a defeatist funk, and needed a demonstration that we were in the war, and that could fight back against the Japanese, who at that point enjoyed an unbroken string of victories. The raid lifted spirits, and gave us renewed optimism, which was far more important than a few planes or factories.

This political fight was much the same. It would have been far worse if the GOP had simply punted. No, we didn't get much, and we've taken a short term hit in the polls, but I think in the long run this will turn out to have been a big net plus, because at least some Republicans put up a fight, and showed that not everybody was a defeatist or a Vichyite. That will be hugely important in the coming fights.

Posted by: pep at October 16, 2013 01:14 PM (6TB1Z)

243 Yes, but a downside is that these sorts of jobs will become even more the exclusive province of the very rich and well-connected. Like unpaid internships in the fashion industry in NYC: only daddy's money allows that to happen. I'm not sure that's something we want.

Yeah, we wouldn't want to risk Washington being run by out-of-touch, elitist pricks. That could put a real fucking damper on all of the good work that's been done on our behalf.

Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at October 16, 2013 01:14 PM (+lsX1)

244 Nood

Posted by: [/i][/b][/u][/s] Tami - GO CARDS!!! at October 16, 2013 01:14 PM (bCEmE)

245 the let it burn is dead

Posted by: akak at October 16, 2013 05:13 PM (4tkxZ)

Oh that's still going to happen.

Posted by: The Gods of the Copybook Headings at October 16, 2013 01:15 PM (2DunM)

246 Austerity? Yes. And one of the first things that need to change is "baseline budgeting". Zero-based budgeting will be the only way toward true cuts in government. Baseline budgeting is really the grand lie.

Posted by: Soona at October 16, 2013 01:15 PM (3Mz5/)

247 Why is everybody so eager to die on a hill? If you die on a hill - like Custer - you have lost. What good is that? Pick a fight you can win. Posted by: Mikey NTH - Outrage Outlet is the Home of the Hostile Takeover at October 16, 2013 04:49 PM (hLRSq) Yeah, that Lee Fellow just puts up too much of a fight.

Posted by: General McClellan. at October 16, 2013 01:16 PM (bb5+k)

248 >>Who IS the other side? It feels kind of lonely on this side of the line >>And since when does elective office make one immune from primaries? I'd like every last one of those House of Lords to worry about it even if it isn't there right now If you honestly believe guys like Ryan who put out the very serious Roadmap budget isn't on our side I think you need to reassess. Sure there are some clowns on our team in DC, there are clowns everywhere. But the Tea Party is the Tea Party because they relentlessly refuse to compromise. That is their raison d'Ãªtre. And they are after not just Dems but guys on the R side who they think aren't pure enough. Read the threads around here. Every single political thread and some of the Kaboom threads are talking about RINO hunting. Sure, primary away. Some of them deserve it, no doubt. But since people around here love to wax nostalgic about Reagan remember he also said that someone who votes with him 80% of the time is an ally and a friend.

Posted by: JackStraw at October 16, 2013 01:16 PM (g1DWB)

249 the let it burn is dead LiB hasn't even broken out the matches yet. Go ahead & try to pay for the 404Care pig. Along with the $222 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities on the backs of 48% of the taxpayers.

Posted by: rickb223 at October 16, 2013 01:18 PM (p9JxP)

250 Well he got taken to the cleaners, by the Solon of Scranton, offers another road to 'electing a new people' through amnesty,

Posted by: Jeffrey Pelt at October 16, 2013 01:19 PM (Jsiw/)

251 I'm just so fucking sick of losing...

Posted by: hello, it's me also a creep-assed cracka.. at October 16, 2013 01:20 PM (9+ccr)

252 My sneaking suspicion is that most people who champion the Herd Conventional Wisdom only do so because other members of the Herd have done so. . . I agree with "most," but there are plenty of wolves wearing wool hanging out in the herd working to shape that conventional wisdom.

Posted by: FRONT TOWARD LEFT at October 16, 2013 01:21 PM (V3kRK)

253 "His main takeaway is that the Tea Party has asserted itself, which is actually good for public policy."

Yes, it asserted itself and the D.C. corridor with its handmaidens in the MFM coalesced to block its assertions. Now The Narrative as embraced by both Progressive DNC and Progressive GOP is that the "cooler heads" as self-defined by those very Progressives were able to get things done, all bipartisan-like, without those pesky kids asking questions. The marginalization has begun in earnest.

Our country is in the process of failing. I'd say it has already failed but for the hyperinflation. You can't walk outside without breaking a law. You may or may not get prosecuted depending on political whim. Your money/life is being redistributed and classism is becoming tangible as wealth is being confiscated, cronies insulated. Your religion and education is being undermined and bastardized, respectively. Blame the TEA Party all you want but it's the team of surgeons telling you that you have cancer and need surgery and chemo. Instead, the patient is saying, "Unless treatment comes via extra nicotine cigarette, I want nothing to do with treatment... and, BTW, quit nagging me about it!"

Once again the political class has reasserted the New Normal which is that they are committed to failure. It's unavoidable. The kabuki will continue until it can't because math. The only question is just the degree of ugliness in our not too distant future. The TEA Party will soldier on, but it will not stop the Borg or the collapse.

And, since I don't drink, the typical escape from reality isn't coming; which, I guess, is just as well. Got to plan with a clear head.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at October 16, 2013 01:22 PM (eHIJJ)

254 equivalent of the Doolittle raid.

---

I was thinking bunker Hill but tomayto, tomahto.

Posted by: WalrusRex at October 16, 2013 01:23 PM (Hx5uv)

255 Yes ace, the conventional wisdom thing is a major problem. Recently, some fucking idiot wrote an article about the US being the first western country to default since Nazi Germany, 1933 because of the tea party.

This has started being brought up on 'conservative' shows.. like the recently moronic Medved show. He used to be logical, but even with this, somehow even he accepted it. I'll never listen again.

Anyone who thinks seriously that we are the same as Germany not paying war reparations is insane. The fact that this started to become herd wisdom is further evidence towards the idiocracy theorem.

There is no hope. Facts don't matter anymore.. not even in the formation of gov't policy. Its gov't by wishcasting. We're done folks. Look to your families and unplug. Learn to take care of yourself and prepare for the worst.

When it does hit the fan, at least we'll be entertained. I'd kinda like to watch LIV's run around wondering where all the money went and why nobody was responsible enough to know this would happen. We can all smile and say 'told ya so, asshole', as the world burns behind us.

Posted by: Bob Milner at October 16, 2013 01:23 PM (0Xy4D)

256 Your are right of course, here they come again letting it burn - thank god they waited until February!

Posted by: akak at October 16, 2013 01:24 PM (4tkxZ)

257 never mind the lame duck factor for both Chitown Jesus or mid termers

Posted by: akak at October 16, 2013 01:25 PM (4tkxZ)

258 Reagan wasn't a bomb-thrower in 1980!
Posted by: Jeff B.

RR built all the bombs needed to bankrupt the USSR. Now the Tranzis are buying ObamaPhones to bankrupt the USSA.

Posted by: DaveA at October 16, 2013 01:26 PM (DL2i+)

259 The last time they surrendered, they got the Sequester, which was Obama's idea in the first place, Winning with extra tiger blood!

Posted by: Jeffrey Pelt at October 16, 2013 01:26 PM (Jsiw/)

260 Problem was we never decided on a strategy and stuck to it. we flopped around like a fish stuck on land Posted by: Nevergiveup at October 16, 2013 05:00 PM (UbDLm) Hard to steer when people are fighting you for the wheel.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 01:27 PM (bb5+k)

261

pep - actually, to geek out on your analogy, there's a serious case to be made that the Doolittle Raid actually gave Yammamoto's Midway operation its final OK from the theretofore reluctant Army, as the Imperial Presence had been endangered, the uniforms all humiliated, and such a thing could never be allowed again - the Midway op had as its goal the luring of the US carriers to their final destruction, giving Japan more time in the Pacific (Yammamoto view, he knew it was only a matter of time, not defeating the US straight-up) and preventing any disastrous repeats of the raid (Army view).

Anyway, you analogy is apt, and the sort of obvious counterpoint to the (sadly) less rigorous thinkers here, who seem to think silence is some magical ingredient to picking up Senate seats in 2014 and who generally show no understanding of politics (all the while imperiously - and mystifyingly - claiming to be the cool-headed tactical geniuses).

polynikes, I appreciate you making several of my precise points in each thread, as I am slow to post comments - it's becoming uncanny.

Oh - and congressional staffers? They wouldn't be uniquely screwed, not even close, with the Vitter language. The law (even as passed, prior to the jaw-droppingly unlawful partial nullification of it via presidential decrees, or whatever they're called now - have to excuse me as I am only familiar with 200+ years of American history and constitutional practices, and not whatever we have today) is wildly inequitable to many parties, aside from being absurdly unconstitutional in several respects and completely unserious as a financial and management framework.

Posted by: non-purist at October 16, 2013 01:27 PM (afQnV)

262 We spend 140% of our revenues. Do you know what YOUR credit rating would be if you did that, year in, year out?
Posted by: soothie at October 16, 2013 04:49 PM

This right here is the most important thing anyone has said in all the posts about this clusterfuck, and brings up a point all the Political Philosophizers -- and, alas, Ace -- are missing.

This is it: No matter what you do, the day will come when this CANNOT be sustained. Not by taxes on The Rich, not by borrowing from China, and not by printing a shitload of new funny money. Money, despite what the New Financial Wizards want to think, is finite. When it goes away, it is G. O. N. E.

On the day that finally is unarguably apparent -- and it will, even to Jeff B. and the rest of that crowd -- there will be a disaster we cannot imagine. I know more about living without money than I want to, and I can't comprehend what the effects multiplied by 350 million will be.

Choom Boy will not be able to fix it with a speech or an executive order. What he will be able to do is blame someone else. Anyone want to guess who?

Blood will be shed then. Ours. We will not get Brownie points for having been all politick-y and reach-across-the-aisle about it. Yes, the Prophets of Choom will starve and suffer, but they will make sure we hurt more.

It may be too late to reverse course. It is definitely too late if we keep on playing the game. There is an ugly truth out there, and it must be told.

Posted by: MrScribbler at October 16, 2013 01:28 PM (kaGpp)

263 199 FUCK Obama's signature. Fuck Harry Reid. The HOUSE controls the purse strings. This does seem to get forgotten. ALOT. Posted by: dogfish at October 16, 2013 05:03 PM (nsOJa) The HOUSE is the asshole of the nation. If it closes up, it eventually wins the fight. NOTHING can stop it. NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING. NOTHING.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 01:29 PM (bb5+k)

264 204 and screwing over the staff in Congress does have a positive effect - maybe they will spend a bit more time reading the shit they shovel and less time chasing skirts. Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 05:03 PM (CMlD4) And as I mentioned earlier, bitching at congressmen.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 01:30 PM (bb5+k)

265 Since defaulting on the debt is an impeachable offense, I wonder if the Establishment surrendered NOW just so they could avoid having to impeach O. They SO do not want that fight and they do not want any more reasons to do it, they've already got a dozen and they are ignoring all of them.

Posted by: Aslan's Girl at October 16, 2013 01:31 PM (KL49F)

266 206 Nevergiveup - dont forget the scotus and their staff Posted by: Jean at October 16, 2013 05:04 PM (CMlD4) With an extra dose of "fuck you!" for good measure!

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 01:33 PM (bb5+k)

267 Yes, but a downside is that these sorts of jobs will become even more the exclusive province of the very rich and well-connected. Like unpaid internships in the fashion industry in NYC: only daddy's money allows that to happen. I'm not sure that's something we want. Posted by: Jeff B. at October 16, 2013 05:04 PM (n/+FT) Problem in the future. Contributing to a solution right now.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 01:34 PM (bb5+k)

268 Um I'm gonna have to ask to see your work between steps 1 and 4. Or perhaps you're using the term 'winning' Charlie Sheen-style. Posted by: MÃ¦tenloch at October 16, 2013 05:07 PM (XkotV) Conlaw 101. All funding bills must originate in the house. NO HOUSE BILL, NO FUNDING. Saw Tip O'neil fuck Reagan too many times to not know the house can do it when it wants.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 01:37 PM (bb5+k)

269 237 the reason the GOP House has to fold is the same reason the GOP Senate and Reagan had to fold in 80's. fear of being called mean. Posted by: X at October 16, 2013 05:10 PM (KHo8t) By the Liberal Democrat Propaganda agents who run the media. Our problems all seem to have a common focus if you look at it.

Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp at October 16, 2013 01:40 PM (bb5+k)

270 and very often has a tactics/strategy problem.

Pretty damn tired of hearing that the tea party or anyone else outside the smart set repubs have a strategy problem, the smart's set genius strategy was to hold a meaningless vote that did nothing except allow them to tell the peasants back home that they voted against obamacare and then use obamacare to fundraise for the foreseeable future, that's it, that's the smart sets genius strategy.

Posted by: booger at October 16, 2013 01:40 PM (xRDdL)

271 What is the downside to becoming Amish as a way to deal with the ObamaCare mandate? Womandate? Persondate?

Posted by: Goatweed at October 16, 2013 01:46 PM (8HrdX)

272 With an extra dose of "fuck you!" for good measure! Posted by: Diogenes' Lamp That's a tax!

Posted by: Justice John Roberts at October 16, 2013 01:47 PM (RFeQD)

273

JackStraw, you've slowly and artfully backed down from polynikes' demand that someone demonstrate the boorish acts of the Tea Party types, but his point stands. Well, implicit point, at least as I see it. Which is that there is a huge amount of baseless polemic aimed at Tea Party types without much reference to actual things they've done that are questionable.

My nick here is meant as a sarcastic swipe at those here who use terms like "purity" and "radical" in distorted or meaningless ways. What is "radical" about fiscal solvency or rule of law? Probably 95% of the major "Tea Party" positions, 20 years ago, would have been slam-dunk consensus positions of a majority of both Houses, and even a plurality of Senate Democrats. Seriously. Opposing the absurd, unconstitutional, freedom-destroying, indefensible mess that is the ACA is "radical"? Recall - this above all is what got "Tea Party" types nominated or elected, and Boehner his majority.

The "purity" thing is just stupid. I oppose those who are unfit or who push disastrous policies, because ..... they are unfit or who push disastrous policies. So those who beclown themselves by using the "purity" concept might consider venturing into ..... specifics. The flight from which is exactly the reason for using such terms.

Paul Ryan? Anyone that demonstrates how clueless they are about the bedrock foundation of our whole system of government - rule of law - as he has is not part of any solution. He's not "impure" - he's "unfit", unfit because of substance, specifics, on hugely important issues. Such as one we might be, suddenly, hearing about again - another orwellian language distortion - immigration "reform". Doesn't matter the reason - the reductionist (but plausible) explanation of Big Business donor pressure, or ..... well, not sure what the other possible explanation could be - can there be "conviction" behind something as transparently unfair, disastrous, and ill-advised as amnesty, or is that a practical IQ problem?

His budgeting stuff is impressive only in the context of today's dumbed-down wasteland that is Congress. Doing budgets like his used to be a common, routine exercise (at any given time there were a zillion interesting budget frameworks lying around for the borrowing, from the better outside groups to the CRS to the Budget Committees when they had decent staff directors). Now this stuff makes him some sort of genius and statesman? OK. Comparatively, sure - but in absolute terms a yawn.

Posted by: non-purist at October 16, 2013 01:52 PM (afQnV)

274 Face, the Republicans as they now exist have no First Prinicples. None. They have a bunch of slogans and outdated bromides they trot out at election time. But they have not invoked any First Principles as reason to VOTE FOR ME. The Democrats also espouse a lot of tripe as principles, but they do have a working First Principle. Buy all the votes you can with government money. It's a lousy and corrupt principle, but it is completely consistent with EVERYTHING they do. And Alex Castellanos is a Republican insider, a guy who makes a really good living getting the grassroots screwed over when they think they are voting for change. They are voting for the go along to get along Republicans that want all that sweet money from Uncle Sugar too, and want to have the power to control the money tap. So really, fuck that guy. Fuck Alex Castellanos. He is as much the enemy of people who want to save the Republic as Obama is. And again, Grover Norquist has made a nice living doing nothing to really change the status quo, except running his stupid little organization and getting on TV talking head shows from time to time. They are both part of the Big Government cockroach class.

Posted by: Severe Conservative riding Orca at October 16, 2013 01:55 PM (RFeQD)

275 The positions of Germany and the US are radically different. The US private sector (like the UK's and Ireland's) spent the last decade borrowing money and building houses. The German private sector spent it saving money and exporting cars. Thus the US (like the UK and Ireland) is dealing with the hangover from the collapse of a private sector debt bubble at home, while Germany is not. Of course Germany could be adversely affected by other countries' private-sector debt problems: foreign creditors could default on their debts, foreign consumers could stop buying cars. But in fact German banks have suffered relatively little for their foreign investments, thanks to the efforts of the ECB and of foreign countries bailing out their banks. (And thanks to the Fed bailing out institutions across Germany, for that matter.) And German exports have been sustained by stimulus programs elsewhere, famously by the huge Chinese stimulus generating a healthy demand for Bimmers. Then there's the currency aspect: the funny thing is that Euro-crisis pessimism weakens the Euro, which boosts German exports, while at the same time (as torquewrench said at 176) still leaving the shared currency too strong for rivals like Italy to recover. If you want a country in the US' position which is doing well out of fiscal austerity, the obvious candidate is now the UK (after a long period where it looked to be doing badly). On the other hand, while the UK's fiscal policy is relatively tight, its monetary policy is as loose as anything. And don't ask any awkward questions about what things will look like when this *next* attempt to pump up the economy through credit and house prices comes to an end, of course.

Posted by: anonymous irishman at October 16, 2013 02:58 PM (DJgfL)

276 They needed to hold line on deb ceiling Nothing bad would happen. What like Waren Buffet knows anyting about economy and or history. He's a big commie showboat just to dupe real Amercans. He and that Gates too are libtards. That's why I don't have a IPAD as that is part of it all. This is disgrace. Sen Cruz needs to take over from OConnel in Senate and then Gomer and Muelscamp from over ta KS need to take over in House from Boner and Eddie Cantor there. And then they impeach president and they'll be next in line and Cruz will be President with like Paul as Veep President. And Lee, Trent Frankss, Gomer and Mulekamp in Cabinet and others too. Then we got Amercica back. Now, now, now! Let's roll!

Posted by: CarlBrane at October 16, 2013 03:22 PM (Qc93O)

277 Don't call it 'single payer'. Call it 'National Socialization'. Has just the right ring to it, wouldn't you say?

Posted by: Handle at October 16, 2013 03:35 PM (XDi7q)

278

In short, all in all, the Shutdown makes me hopeful for the future of the Tea Party, the Republican Party and America. It showed that the Tea Party has produced a significant number of elected officials with integrity and willing to go through political fire to enact their goals, and can push the GOP in the right direction.

__________

Shorter: Establishment GOP is in it for their own power and would sell the country down the river to get/maintain that power.

Posted by: socalcon at October 16, 2013 04:15 PM (vHlQ5)

279

On the bright side, all those DC Progressives (on the right and left) will die and spend eternity in hell.

After the past month, that's all I got. So, sue me!

Posted by: socalcon at October 16, 2013 04:20 PM (vHlQ5)

280 I still think that the GOP is going the way of the Whigs. The Tea Party clearly isn't ready to win elections yet, but neither was the Republican Party in 1854. The Dems were backing long-term loser policies then, and they're backing long-term loser policies now. Give 'em a chance to keep fucking up, right alongside the twenty-first century Whigs. Disenfranchised voters and crossover candidates with political muscle will do the rest.

Posted by: Dirty Old Man at October 16, 2013 04:58 PM (AmJQd)

281 So, Ace, you like German policies when you can use them to support your team's argument? Why do you suppose that Germany hasn't embraced a red state model when it comes to industrial policy and labor? Shouldn't they be busting up unions and driving down wages in order to make themselves more "dynamic" like the United States? I'm not saying I agree with the German model, especially the way they pervert the market by subsidizing various industries and providing wage supports, but maybe a country can still compete economically while providing fair wages and generous benefits to workers? Maybe? NAAAAAAHHHHHHH. Unions are for lazy bums. People should be happy to get what they get.....blah, blah, blah, blah.....

Posted by: stickety at October 16, 2013 06:16 PM (+Vm+w)

282 premature austerity Excuse me? If not now, when? If not us, who? $17 trillion and climbing is the current debt. Then there's the unfunded social security and medicade. That's several tens of trillions more. I guess by premature, this goober wants to have the austerity occur after his death.

Posted by: I R A Darth Aggie © at October 17, 2013 05:13 AM (1hM1d)

Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.

257kb generated in CPU 0.2718, elapsed 0.4454 seconds.
64 queries taking 0.391 seconds, 410 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.