SHUTDOWN SHOWDOWN..

[ekg]

  talk about sensational..

anyway, I found this pretty interesting..

Boehner wants to pass spending cuts with GOP alone

Sometimes in politics and legislation, whether you win is less important than how you win.

That's the dilemma facing House Speaker John Boehner as he tries to round up the votes to pass a fast-approaching spending compromise and avert a partial government shutdown by week's end.

Boehner, R-Ohio, wants the overwhelming majority of those votes to come from his fellow Republicans, even if dozens of easily attainable Democratic votes could help carry the budget bill to victory.

The goal complicates Boehner's task, and possibly could push the bill farther to the right. It motivates him to battle for the votes of conservative Republicans who are demanding deeper spending cuts, and greater changes to social issues such as abortion access, than the Democratic-controlled Senate and President Barack Obama say they can accept.

If Boehner can argue convincingly that it's the only route to House passage, Democrats conceivably could yield on some points they might otherwise win. At the same time, however, Boehner is trying to persuade Republicans that some compromise is inevitable.

"We control one-half of one-third of the government," he said last week. "We can't impose our will on the Senate."

Eventually, both parties must decide where to draw the line in negotiations and whether to risk a government shutdown that could trigger unpredictable political fallout.

Some congressional veterans say Boehner is taking the only realistic approach for a speaker who wants to stay in power. If he cuts a deal that relies heavily on Democrats' votes, he could alienate scores of House Republicans, who might in turn start seeking a new leader.

"You always have to please at least half your caucus, plus one," said John Feehery, a top aide to the previous Republican speaker, Rep. Dennis Hastert of Illinois.

Hastert had a "majority of the majority" rule. It meant he would bring no major bill to the House floor unless most Republicans supported it.

It didn't matter if every House Democrat backed the bill, which would allow it to pass with a minority of Republicans. In essence, Democrats' votes were irrelevant to Hastert. Boehner is taking a similar approach, at least publicly.

"Not very interested," Boehner told reporters last week when asked about forming a coalition with Democrats to pass the legislation to keep the government operating.

Lawmakers and the White House are negotiating, but all sides agree the measure should cut more than $32 billion from current-year spending. Many Republicans want deeper cuts.

Boehner has told colleagues he wants at least 218 House Republicans to vote for the spending package. That's the magic number for passing bills in the 435-member House.

blah-blah-blah

so, he knows that they only control 1/3 of 1/2 of the gov't...  where as the tea-baggers don't really get that point

-He knows that the country is sick of partsian-stupid and they want bi-partsian compromise, but he can't care because of the Tea-baggers
-He's not interested in getting any Dem votes, or compromise because of the tea-baggers
-He knows he and his party will be blamed for a shutdown, but the tea-baggers what the shutdown
-He got a standing ovation from his caucus when he warned them of a shutdown, again because the tea-baggers want the shutdown
-He asked for 32 BN months ago, and got 33Bn and even admitted yesterday the President has given more than Boehner expected, but getting what you asked for is not what the tea-baggers want, they want to shut it down.

at what point does Boehner just meltdown from the stress of it all?

I almost feel bad for the guy, he wants that 'gavel' so badly that he has to stick with people who refuse to move.. These people don't understand that if they sign this agreement today, they've won! What's on the table is the GOP's original offer plus 1bn more..  

At this point they look like Lucy pulling the football away from Charlie Brown. Every time they get what they ask for, they decide.. nah, we want something else.. add in that what they really want is a gov't shutdown and it's pretty clear just how fucked up this radicalization of the GOP has gotten..

seriously, wants only GOP votes? Not any Dem votes.. and he's still trying to pretend like the Dems are the one who won't compromise?

eh, what am I saying.. our press won't call him on any of it, so it really doesn't matter..and this Pres and Reid will cave in eventually because they just can't fight..

anyway, for any old-school republican looking around wondering wtf happened to your party? Hey, this is what you get when you sit by and let the tiger loose because they are doing your bidding. eventually that tiger gets more and more power and then turns on you. You could have nipped it in the bud at any time along the way, but stayed silent and now you've got to lay in the bed you've created..

[uselesslegs]

Sometimes you get what you "acted" like you wanted...in droooveesss.

The tea party will take nothing less than a Government shut down at this point, since they didn't get some magical insane number of 500b or 1 trillion dollars that doesn't touch taxes of the wealthiest, military spending, subsidies, corp tax loop holes and breaks, ect., ect.

They keep using this analogy of not living beyond your budget, as it pertains to a household.  I wonder how quick they'd be to continue to use that analogy if all their elderly and disabled relatives lived with them?  "I'm sorry Aunt Judy, Cousin Scott, and my brother Bob, but I'm going to drastically reduce your meds and other access to medical care...so I can get that new car and pretend to attack household finances.  Uncle Don and Grandma Ruby, I'm gonna take more of your social security and disability checks so the wife and I don't have to stop going out to movies and to eat 3 times a week.  We ALL gotta sacrifice more now *sniff*.  The tea party want to take this "personal responsibility" and apply it to children, the elderly, and the disabled.  Talk about a death panel.   

They want this across the board approach, that is wholly not "across the board", and refuse to address the paradox it creates by continuing to enrich others at the expense of the most vulnerable, but insist it's the only thing we can do.  Really?  "Not my fault they were born whacky, they're drag'in us down man. If they can't figure out a way to capitalize on marketing their drool, then their just take'in up space."

[Howey]

Boehner's an idiot incapable of managing the House and budget negotiations on behalf of his party. He's allowed a vocal, but fringe, element of the party dictate every move he makes.

Pretty sad since the majority of them have been in office, what? three months?

[Howey]

Who supports compromise vs. a shutdown?

As negotiators in Congress squabble over the size and scope of spending cuts for the remainder of the fiscal year, Democrats and Republicans outside the Beltway differ dramatically in how they want their leaders to handle the budget stalemate, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

In a contrast that illustrates why the standoff has pushed the federal government to the verge of a shutdown, the poll finds an overwhelming majority of Democrats wanting the leaders of their party in Congress to compromise, and a majority of Republicans wanting theirs to stand firm.

That's a 68% overwhelming majority of Democrats willing to compromise vs. an overwhelming 56% of Republicans wanting their party to not compromise, regardless of the outcome (shutdown).

[Howey]

Before someone screams out "But that's a liberal MSNBC poll!": It was conducted with the WSJ, not exactly a bastion of liberal ideas. And in conjunction with Republican pollster Bill McInturff.

Two more polls:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/146969/Americans-Favor-Budget-Compromise-Shutdown.aspx

[img=http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/4cb4225e71.gif]

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/04/poll-more-democrats-than-republicans-favor-compromise-on-budget/

Just days away from a potential government shutdown, a majority of Democrats and independents say lawmakers with whom they share views should be more willing to compromise even if that results in a budget they disagree with. But fewer Republicans, especially those that agree with the Tea Party movement, say the same, according to a new poll by the Pew Research Center.

Over all, 55 percent of Americans, including 53 percent of independents and 69 percent of Democrats, want lawmakers whose views they agree with to compromise. But 50 percent of Republicans, including 56 percent of conservative Republicans, want lawmakers who share their views to stand by their principles, even if that means the government will shut down. Among Republicans and Republicans-leaning independents who agree with the Tea Party, 68 percent want lawmakers who share their views to stand on principle.

I'd like someone to explain how the Republicans are reflecting "the will of the people".

[Howey]

Another question:

If a deal is reached and signed into law by Friday, who will be bitching it didn't follow Boehner's 72 hour rule?

[Howey]

Heh...no wonder lilMike's so scared of Think Progress!

[ekg]

I watched Hannity last night for as long as I could take it, which wasn't very long (ha) and it's amazing to watch the 'other side' in this.. Hannity wants a shutdown, he's telling the congressmen on his show to stick to their guns and not back down and 'we here at Fox, will have your back".. at the same time, they are all blaming the Dems for wanting to shut everything down.  They're saying the Dems just won't 'deal' and 'compromise'.. wtf? You can't advocate sticking to your guns and not backing down and then blame the other side because they won't compromise.. especially when that side gave you 105% of what you asked for right off the bat..

it's like neither side understand negotiation.. Obama/Dems think it means giving the other-side everything they ask and then giving them more.. and Boehner/tea-baggers think it's demanding more when you get everything you wanted to begin with.. it's like retard-compromise or something..

Over the last few days 2 things have become glaringly clear... 1) there is a section of the GOP that wants a shutdown more than they want a reduced budget. They pretend that they want to cut spending, but what they really want is to lead the other side on by moving the goal posts again and again and again until they finally reach the end point and they get the shutdown... the 2nd) obvious fact also backs up the 1st, and that's that this was never about the 'budget' to begin with. What does abortion rights,EPA and birth control have to do with this and, if you ask for 33bn and you get it, why does it matter if that 33bn doesn't all come from the programs you want it to come from? The net result is the same a -33Bn in spending.

None of this is about spending or the budget.. it's about extreme christian ideology and paying back this or that business for their donations..

I had more hopes for the tea-baggers, but they are more 'bought and paid for' than any other group in Washington today..

Matthews made a great point last night, he said 'who would ever believe that the Dems, the party of Big Government, would ever want to shut that government down' and he's right.. let see, we have a party that wants the biggest gov't they can get (or so the other side says) and the other party who hates gov't and wants the smallest one they can get(or so they claim).. hmmmm I wonder who would be at fault if the government actually shutdown.. gee that's a tough one..

[44nutman]

Another question:

If a deal is reached and signed into law by Friday, who will be bitching it didn't follow Boehner's 72 hour rule?

The Weiner will. He may find another childrens book to make fun of the Gop. I love The Weiner.

[ekg]

The Weiner will. He may find another childrens book to make fun of the Gop. I love The Weiner.

Have you seen this yet?




I love the "what am I, Anthony Waynor? Just embrace it brother" part 

[uselesslegs]

I like ole Anthony because he refuses to let glaring inconsistencies go quietly into gentle discourse.  He's also not a fan of, "I have my facts and you have yours, so we'll just have to agree to disagree."  Ohhhhhh hellllllll no.

[Howey]

More questions...

Why is there a policy rider to the budget defunding Planned Parenthood to prevent abortions?
Since when does Planned Parenthood perform abortions with federal funds?

[uselesslegs]

More questions...

Why is there a policy rider to the budget defunding Planned Parenthood to prevent abortions?
Since when does Planned Parenthood perform abortions with federal funds?

I believe there are 500 riders.  I'm not sure which Rep. on the floor went right for the, "If you don't pass this, you're against the military, troops, blah-blah", but that made me just shy of livid to hear the words.

When people start playing that card, knowing they've set up ass loads of conditions in the process and STILL dare you to cross that line...I want to throat punch.  It really gets under my skin.

[Howey]

"If you don't pass this, you're against the military, troops, blah-blah

Dammit. That was my next question! That was the breaking point for me today. They're even calling it "The Troop Funding Bill" now! What's sad is the millions of idiots out there who'll believe it.

New question: Was it a Democrat who wanted to do away with veteran's disability?

[Howey]

I suspect Think Progress isn't lying about this:

http://twitter.com/#!/thinkprogress/statuses/56457832400297985