Blitzer: "Why the fuck did we bring this show back?"
Always love how the woman on the right is smiling until he shows up.
Blitzer: "Why the fuck did we bring this show back?"
Always love how the woman on the right is smiling until he shows up.
So 22 gopers + blue dems can give the majority right?
So 22 gopers + blue dems can give the majority right?
On my phone but new story up at nytimes how boehner will not let country default, and will pass debt ceiling with dem votes.
On my phone but new story up at nytimes how boehner will not let country default, and will pass debt ceiling with dem votes.
After this is over, any future deals should involve concessions from the Republicans to balance out the costs of their latest PR debacle/stunt.He's said it a few times in the build up to this. I have a feeling that the debt ceiling will signal the end of the shutdown.
(nytimes)The research firm IHS Inc. estimates that the shutdown will cost the country $300 million a day in lost economic output. That average will probably grow if the impasse continues, as more agencies run out of saved funds and receive no new appropriations. Moodys Analytics estimated that a shutdown of three or four weeks would cut 1.4 percentage points from fourth-quarter economic growth and raise the unemployment rate.
A lot of people covering it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/04/us/politics/debt-limit-impasse.html?_r=0
http://www.latimes.com/nation/polit...democrats-debt-limit-20131003,0,1779287.story
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...f42abc-2c24-11e3-8ade-a1f23cda135e_story.html
Seems likely to see a debt ceiling raise and a continuing shutdown. Republicans can then continue the "not negotiating" narrative by even saying they even gave everything Dems want for the debt ceiling.
On my phone but new story up at nytimes how boehner will not let country default, and will pass debt ceiling with dem votes.
It should be enough to pass a clean CR should it come to the floor and the 22 aren't all talk.
Conflict over the responsibility for the government shutdown got personal at the World War II Memorial in Washington, D.C. Wednesday when a member of Congress confronted a U.S. Park Service Ranger over access to the closed park land.
The congressman was Randy Neugebauer, a Republican representing Texas. He confronted the ranger in the middle of a crowd of tourists as she was keeping most of the public out of the closed World War II memorial.
The Park Service has been allowing World War II vets who have traveled from all over the country to enter the memorial, even though it's closed during the government shutdown; the rangers say they are exercising their First Amendment rights as they let the veterans in.
But they are keeping the rest of the public out of the facility, which is officially closed. And that did not sit well with the congressman, reported News4's Mark Segraves, who witnessed the confrontation.
"How do you look at them and... deny them access?" said Neugebauer. He, with most House Republicans, had voted early Sunday morning to pass a funding measure that would delay the Affordable Care Act, a vote that set up a showdown with the Senate and President Barack Obama. With the parties unable to agree on how to fund the federal government, non-essential government functions shut down Tuesday.
"It's difficult," responded the Park Service employee.
"Well, it should be difficult," replied the congressman, who was carrying a small American flag in his breast pocket.
"It is difficult," responded the Park Service employee. "I'm sorry, sir."
"The Park Service should be ashamed of themselves," the congressman said.
"I'm not ashamed," replied the ranger.
At that point, a crowd of onlookers got involved. "Ask those questions of the people who aren't passing the budget," shouted a voice from the crowd. "That's who you need to ask these questions to."
"This woman is doing her job, just like me," shouted another. "I'm a 30-year federal veteran -- I'm out of work."
The man, wearing a bicycle helmet, at this point was face to face with the congressman.
"Well, the reason you are is because Mr. Reid decided to shut down the government," responded Neugebauer, referring to the top Senate Democrat.
"No, it's because the government won't do its job and pass a budget," the bicyclist responded.
"The House did its job; it passed appropriations. The Senate hasn't," said another voice from the crowd.
Neugebauer walked away at that point.
The veterans were in D.C. thanks to the Honor Flight Network, which provides flights to D.C. for veterans so they can visit the memorials. Thousands of vets are still on their way to D.C. this weekend as part of the program.
At this point, the Senate should just pass a clean bill that raises the debt ceiling, and then go home. There is literally nothing for them to do until Boehner brings the clean CR to the floor. Hell, House democrats should go home too. This is a 100% internal house GOP issue.
It would get filibustered.
The debt limit raise can get filibustered?
That's not good.
You aren't kidding.
The "Obamacare funding" CR got through the senate without a filibuster. I'm not worried, at all.
I hope the WH takes advantage of anti-Cruz senators more, actually. Let's get some economy bills passed and send them to the House.
The "Obamacare funding" CR got through the senate without a filibuster. I'm not worried, at all.
I hope the WH takes advantage of anti-Cruz senators more, actually. Let's get some economy bills passed and send them to the House.
Right, because it was a House bill. If the House passes a debt ceiling raise, it won't be filibustered. If the Senate brings one up the day before the debt limit ceiling, it won't get filibustered.
But if Reid brought it up today, it most certainly would.
That's because Cruz was using some obscure trick by filibustering the House's bill because he couldn't filibuster the senate bill, or something like that. Doesn't really look too good to filibuster the bill you're supporting.
I'd assume the debt limit is the classical one that's a lot easier to use, but maybe I'm wrong.
That's because Cruz was using some obscure trick by filibustering the House's bill because he couldn't filibuster the senate bill, or something like that. Doesn't really look too good to filibuster the bill you're supporting.
I'd assume the debt limit is the classical one that's a lot easier to use, but maybe I'm wrong.
Pretty sure the clean CR got through because there was a procedural reason that it couldn't be filibustered... ?
Pretty sure the clean CR got through because there was a procedural reason that it couldn't be filibustered... ?
Why the leadership is quietly preparing to tie the debt limit to the CR and not sweating the shutdown...
1) clean CR alone wld cause revolt; tying a CR to debt limit package enables a clean CR to pass if part of package
2) Ldrshp allies know GOP can't get concession 4 clean CR, but combo w/, say, med dev tx rpl + tax reform mechanism cld encourage support
@ByronYork 49s
Growing embrace of theory that Boehner can only afford one cave & remain Speaker. Cave on funding, then cave on debt limit would be deadly…
Very interesting, from Costa...
A clean CR and debt ceiling raise in the same package would be hilarious. I hope democrats refuse to compromise but that deal plus a repeal of the medical device tax will probably win a lot of democrat support...
edit:
Goes back to what we've been discussing about Boehner managing failure. If he can't get anything, he'll certainly be forced to pass the debt ceiling raise. But adding a clean CR to that, presumably after failing to secure the medical tax ban (as Costa mentioned above), would end his career.
The whole middle-class-up economy format is completely ridiculous. Because whos going to give the middle class their money? The upper class. The middle class isnt going to make money coming out of nowhere. Theyve got to get a job. And who gives the jobs? The rich people. So if you take all the rich peoples money, theyre not going to be able to give anybody a job. Just its so backwards. He keeps talking about a strong middle class. I dont want a strong middle class. I want to make all the middle class rich people, because then youve got even more rich people who can give more jobs. Its like aits just ridiculous.
(Tea Party man, Raleigh)
Meanwhile, some Diablos bait from Fox News:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/int...-support-obamacare-delay-disapprove-congress/
Obama net approval -4 (month over month +10)
Congress net approval -68 (month over month -10)
Obama/health care net approval -6 (month over month +14)
Obama/economy net approval -16 (month over month +7)
Obama/Syria net approval -13 (month over month +18)
Obamacare:
Repeal 30% (-9 since June)
Repeal parts 24% (+5 since June)
Expand 15% (-2 since June)
Leave as is 26% (+7 since June)
Defunding Obamacare: 41% yes, 53% no
Ted Cruz's fauxlibuster: 19% helped his cause, 36% hurt his cause
Who's responsible for the shutdown:
House GOP 25%
Senate GOP 17%
Dems 8%
Obama 24%
An interesting point: most people still think that Obamacare will be bad for them. However, by 1 point, they now think most Americans will benefit from it.
A thread on this PDF might be fun.
Ted Cruz has been noticeably silent. Hm.
Brah, it is a Faux News poll.Meanwhile, some Diablos bait from Fox News:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/int...-support-obamacare-delay-disapprove-congress/
Obama net approval -4 (month over month +10)
Congress net approval -68 (month over month -10)
Obama/health care net approval -6 (month over month +14)
Obama/economy net approval -16 (month over month +7)
Obama/Syria net approval -13 (month over month +18)
Obamacare:
Repeal 30% (-9 since June)
Repeal parts 24% (+5 since June)
Expand 15% (-2 since June)
Leave as is 26% (+7 since June)
Defunding Obamacare: 41% yes, 53% no
Ted Cruz's fauxlibuster: 19% helped his cause, 36% hurt his cause
Who's responsible for the shutdown:
House GOP 25%
Senate GOP 17%
Dems 8%
Obama 24%
An interesting point: most people still think that Obamacare will be bad for them. However, by 1 point, they now think most Americans will benefit from it.
Hearing Tom Friedman go all-in on the Boehner, The Tea Party, and Fox News was classic.
Hearing some of the call-ins though makes me smh.
Same.
A thread on this PDF might be fun.
And on Wednesday at a private luncheon, several Senate Republicans Dan Coats of Indiana, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire assailed Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, who has led the movement to block funding for the health law.
Ms. Ayotte was especially furious, according to two people present, and waved a printout from a conservative group friendly to Mr. Cruz attacking 25 of his fellow Republican senators for supporting a procedural vote that the group counted as support of the health law.
Ms. Ayotte asked Mr. Cruz to disavow the groups effort and demanded he explain his strategy. When he did not, several other senators including Mr. Johnson, Mr. Coats and even Mitch McConnell, the minority leader joined in the criticism of Mr. Cruz.
It just started a lynch mob, said a senator who was present.
Despite the uproar, Mr. Cruz did not offer a plan for how his plan for how his party could prevail in the shutdown battle and suggested his colleagues were defeatists.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/04/us/politics/gop-elders-see-liabilities-in-shutdown.html
The disintegration of the modern GOP is happening. It's clear that the frustration over the antics of the Tea Party is now a huge problem with the GOP. Most Tea Partiers have no knowledge or comprehension of politics and think that strategies like the shutdown will work.
Christopher Parker and Matt Barreto, who teach political science at the University of Washington, recently published “Change They Can’t Believe In: The Tea Party and Reactionary Politics in America.” They contend that there are two major strands of conservatism in America: what they call “non Tea Party,” “traditional” or “real” conservatism; and what they describe as “Tea Party,” “reactionary” or “pseudo-conservatism.”
In response to my inquiry, Parker wrote in an e-mail:
"Ultimately, a conservative — in the classical sense — wishes to preserve a stable society. Of course, this includes stable institutions and observing the rule of law. For these reasons (and several more), a conservative prefers evolutionary, more incremental change to revolutionary change: revolutionary change threatens the stability conservatives seek to conserve. Hence, conservatives reluctantly accept change — so long as it isn’t revolutionary. They do so for the sake of stability and order. Moreover, for the sake of order and stability, real conservatives are amenable to political compromise with their opponents."
Conversely, according to Parker, reactionary conservatives are backwards looking, generally fearful of losing their way of life in a wave of social change. To preserve their group’s social status, they’re willing to undermine long-established norms and institutions — including the law. They see political differences as a war of good versus evil in which their opponents are their enemies. For them, compromise is commensurate with defeat — not political expediency. They believe social change is subversive to the America with which they’ve become familiar, i.e., white, mainly male, Protestant, native born, straight. “Real Americans,” in other words.
I hope and pray that the rise of the Tea Party will ultimately be a good thing as it reveals the absolutely insane underbelly that's been building so we can stab it through the heart and throw holy water on it.http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/04/us/politics/gop-elders-see-liabilities-in-shutdown.html
The disintegration of the modern GOP is happening. It's clear that the frustration over the antics of the Tea Party is now a huge problem with the GOP. Most Tea Partiers have no knowledge or comprehension of politics and think that strategies like the shutdown will work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCaixOPkgaQ
Kinda feeling like this right now.
Everyone listen to it, pretty good chillaxin' music for otherwise stressful times.