So the 'S word' was uttered openly in a meeting at work this morning.

Oh joy . . .

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stancollender/...en-more-likely/

Pretty good analysis of how things are likely to play out a month from now:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-...nment-shutdown/

 

“Conservatives have a ‘bright shiny object’ problem: They become fixated with the outrage-du-jour and shove all other strategic considerations aside. Republican backbenchers decide it’s more important to show how hard they can shake their fists instead of giving their leadership maximum leverage for inevitable negotiations with Democrats.” And outside groups and talk radio, both in the business of stoking rage, use these episodes to denounce the “establishment” (people who count votes and want to keep the government running), sell books, raise money and hold their audience. It is the essence of “dysfunction,” not to mention cynicism.

Pretty good analysis of how things are likely to play out a month from now:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-...nment-shutdown/

 

I think it is hilarious that someone thinks that only one political party does this.

I, too, remember Democrats frequently threatening to shut down the government.

We got the "hey, we might have to shut down in a week" e-mail from the department Secretary today.

Republicans in the Senate have proposed a short-term funding bill that strips funding from PP. There are still a lot of hardliner republicans in both the Senate and the House who seem more than willing to shut down the federal government yet again.

Republicans in the Senate have proposed a short-term funding bill that strips funding from PP. There are still a lot of hardliner republicans in both the Senate and the House who seem more than willing to shut down the federal government yet again.

 

The Congressman for our district and one of the two Senators are part of that hardliner group. Yet based on conversation that I hear here at work, the majority of employees voted for both of them. Same goes with the owners of many of the businesses in the area that will lose business during a shutdown. There are 3-4 restaurants near here that get 80+% of their lunch business from us. One of them went under during the shutdown 2 years ago from the lost business and went on TV and blamed Obama's tax policies as the reason his restaurant went under.

I think it is hilarious that someone thinks that only one political party does this.

While I'm all about the "both parties are bad" angle, I am not sure I recall Democrats in the House (at times when they have had control) pulling the shutdown brinkmanship very often. Certainly not as often as the GOP has in recent years.

 

Sometimes, there are differences between the parties' style, not even always a good versus bad thing. Republicans (enough of them anyway to make it happen) are far more willing, it appears, to threaten death on many, many hills, in order to make a point.

 

While I'm all about the "both parties are bad" angle, I am not sure I recall Democrats in the House (at times when they have had control) pulling the shutdown brinkmanship very often. Certainly not as often as the GOP has in recent years.

 

Sometimes, there are differences between the parties' style, not even always a good versus bad thing. Republicans (enough of them anyway to make it happen) are far more willing, it appears, to threaten death on many, many hills, in order to make a point.

 

While it hasn't happened on the federal level, Democrats in both Indiana and Texas left their respective states in order to such down the legislatures. I truely believe the only reason we haven't seen the same shutdown scenarios is because of who is in charge and by what percentages they are in charge by.

 

While I'm all about the "both parties are bad" angle, I am not sure I recall Democrats in the House (at times when they have had control) pulling the shutdown brinkmanship very often. Certainly not as often as the GOP has in recent years.

 

Sometimes, there are differences between the parties' style, not even always a good versus bad thing. Republicans (enough of them anyway to make it happen) are far more willing, it appears, to threaten death on many, many hills, in order to make a point.

 

There were shutdowns during 6 of Reagan's 8 years in office, though they totaled up to only 14 days.

 

The last two shutdowns occurred with Clinton and Obama in office and those two totaled up to 27 days.

 

So at the national level, Democrats have not been willing to cause as much damage with their shutdowns.

 

As to the state level shutdowns ss2k mentioned, the one in Indiana was a legislative walkout that prevented a specific bill from getting passed. It didn't stop government work and stop employees from getting paid the way the Federal shutdowns have. (Although I do still think it was wrong of them to walk out like that.)

There were shutdowns during 6 of Reagan's 8 years in office, though they totaled up to only 14 days.

 

The last two shutdowns occurred with Clinton and Obama in office and those two totaled up to 27 days.

 

So at the national level, Democrats have not been willing to cause as much damage with their shutdowns.

 

As to the state level shutdowns ss2k mentioned, the one in Indiana was a legislative walkout that prevented a specific bill from getting passed. It didn't stop government work and stop employees from getting paid the way the Federal shutdowns have. (Although I do still think it was wrong of them to walk out like that.)

All good points. Also agree that the walk-outs, while they did not stop government work in the same way, were pretty stupid.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/09/24/...e-disaster.html

 

Even Karl Rove gets it.

There were shutdowns during 6 of Reagan's 8 years in office, though they totaled up to only 14 days.

 

The last two shutdowns occurred with Clinton and Obama in office and those two totaled up to 27 days.

 

So at the national level, Democrats have not been willing to cause as much damage with their shutdowns.

 

As to the state level shutdowns ss2k mentioned, the one in Indiana was a legislative walkout that prevented a specific bill from getting passed. It didn't stop government work and stop employees from getting paid the way the Federal shutdowns have. (Although I do still think it was wrong of them to walk out like that.)

IIRC there was also a different setup during the Reagan years where the shutdowns also weren't as government-wide and new laws were passed afterwards making it harder for agencies to continue operating.

John Boehner Will Resign From Congress

 

Wow. This does not bode well for a functional government.

 

edit: or maybe he brings a funding bill to the floor that will pass with Democratic support as a final "f*** you" to the hard right members that are pushing for another shutdown.

Edited September 25, 201510 yr by StrangeSox

John Boehner Will Resign From Congress

 

Wow. This does not bode well for a functional government.

 

edit: or maybe he brings a funding bill to the floor that will pass with Democratic support as a final "f*** you" to the hard right members that are pushing for another shutdown.

 

I originally thought it was the former, but everything I'm reading indicates that it's the latter. The extreme right wing no longer has any power over him and he can get a CR passed.

 

It sounds like he fell on his sword to protect the country from a shutdown.

Well, credit where credit is due if that's how it shakes out. It won't be the first time he's put the priority of a functional federal government over his own position.

Tough thing about shutting down the government is that there isn't a 100%, indisputable offending party. Technically speaking, both sides have the option to vote for what the other side wants

They can try to make that argument, but at least in 2013, the public wasn't buying it and overwhelmingly put the blame on the Republicans.

 

Technically, the police have the option to give into all of the hostage-taker's demands, but we'd still put the blame for any harm on the hostage-takers.

I originally thought it was the former, but everything I'm reading indicates that it's the latter. The extreme right wing no longer has any power over him and he can get a CR passed.

 

It sounds like he fell on his sword to protect the country from a shutdown.

 

For 3 months.

Tough thing about shutting down the government is that there isn't a 100%, indisputable offending party. Technically speaking, both sides have the option to vote for what the other side wants

 

The offending party is the party that is willing to shut down the government over the status quo. In 2013, Obamacare was the established status quo. In 2015, PP funding is the status quo. Personally, I think PP is a soulless, morally bankrupt organization, but I'm not in favor of shutting down the entire government to defund it.

I like Boehner.

How come Obama's presidency has been stock full of these government shutdown incidents? Growing old. Our country needs something good to happen. The pope's visit wasn't enough. This country is really in the doldrums right now economically and culturally.

How come Obama's presidency has been stock full of these government shutdown incidents? Growing old. Our country needs something good to happen. The pope's visit wasn't enough. This country is really in the doldrums right now economically and culturally.

I just can't get over your bizarre takes lately. Obama's Presidency? This is Congress - which is even more dysfunctional than the White House. Nothing is even reaching the President's desk.

 

I was really hoping the pope's visit would resolve this too.