Harry Reid... leader of the "I will not negotiate" caucus

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Easy E**

The Senate has agreed. Too bad they were never really the problem. It is the House R's.

The question is can we get enough Rs to vote with the Ds to pass. I'm not entirely sure I believe the Washington posts Whip counts, but at least it is a staight up and down vote.

Even if this passes, we will have to do it all again on 2/7/2014.

**Frazzled**

Easy E wrote:
daedalus-templarius wrote:
Deal in the works coming from senate, libertarian party/republicans basically get nothing of what they wanted.

Bohner to send over a 'clean message' to help expedite tomorrow.

Looks like we might not default after all. Of course, Cruz could still go full slow and try to filibuster it himself.

Yeah, I'm sure Boehner will bring it to his Caucus. The guy knows it is DOA.

This is the first time where I am not confident a deal will be struck befor ethe midnight hour. There is no face-saving way for Republicans or Democrats to back away from their positions. Someone will have to capitulate.

For Republicans that equal electoral "death" in their base, sinc ethe Conservative movement never fails, it can only be failed. For Dems, it means giving up on their marquee legislation that has taken since Truman to get anywhere, and electoral death from their base.

It is a political suicide pact!

Edit: Some people (like David Weigel) are reporting tha the House Republicans have collapsed and a deal is imminent. I'm not sure I believe it.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/10/16/the_final_collapse_of_the_house_republicans.html

There are more than enough democratic and Republican votes to pass it.
Enough with the Tea Party hand holding (and I'd probably fit the definition of Tea Party myself). For the good of the nation move forward or face depression and all the political ramifications that extend from that (I like Palin believe allowing a default is a Treasonable Offense. Unlike Palin the people about to be convicted would not be the Administration)

**BaronIveagh**

Frazzled wrote:

There are more than enough democratic and Republican votes to pass it.
Enough with the Tea Party hand holding (and I'd probably fit the definition of Tea Party myself). For the good of the nation move forward or face depression and all the political ramifications that extend from that (I like Palin believe allowing a default is a Treasonable Offense. Unlike Palin the people about to be convicted would not be the Administration)

What they could do is filibuster it or use the rules of the house to delay it's introduction until after the default. God only knows with these yahoos.

**Frazzled**

Cruz just said he would not attempt to block.

**BaronIveagh**

Frazzled wrote:
Cruz just said he would not attempt to block.

Yeah, but Cruz is a senator, not a member of the house, IIRC.

**Frazzled**

BaronIveagh wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Cruz just said he would not attempt to block.

Yeah, but Cruz is a senator, not a member of the house, IIRC.

The House has no filibuster rules.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
WH has now signed off on Senate plan.

**Easy E**

It sounds like we have a plan.

However, the wierd thign is that the Republicans get nothign for their tantrum, and are still signing off on the plan. Will this put an end to their "negotiation" tactics forever, or only postpone it until Feb?

**d-usa**

Republicans are getting some stuff they wanted though:

-Legislated budget negotiations between the two houses (a weird new demand starting the day before the shutdown and the Republicans idea even though the Senate asked for it a few months now)
-The original $ amount from the CR that the Democrats initially agreed to (which was lower than what they wanted and was a concession to the Republicans already)
-Income verification measures for ObamaCare subsidies.

It's not like the Republicans are not getting a single thing out of this compromise.

**whembly**

d-usa wrote:
Republicans are getting some stuff they wanted though:

-Legislated budget negotiations between the two houses (a weird new demand starting the day before the shutdown and the Republicans idea even though the Senate asked for it a few months now)
-The original $ amount from the CR that the Democrats initially agreed to (which was lower than what they wanted and was a concession to the Republicans already)
-Income verification measures for ObamaCare subsidies.

It's not like the Republicans are not getting a single thing out of this compromise.

Actually... they got more than I thought they'd ever get.

But WTF is the -Income verification measures for ObamaCare subsidies? Isn't that the law anyways? Or, is this something different? o.O

**Ouze**

whembly wrote:
But WTF is the -Income verification measures for ObamaCare subsidies? Isn't that the law anyways? Or, is this something different? o.O

If you read past the editorializing, this should answer your questions.

**whembly**

Ouze wrote:
whembly wrote:
But WTF is the -Income verification measures for ObamaCare subsidies? Isn't that the law anyways? Or, is this something different? o.O

If you read past the editorializing, this should answer your questions.

Um... that's seems pretty odd. After digging some more, I found out why the House was interested in this...

Looks like the Administration essentially admitted that they won’t be able to verify whether or not applicants for Obamacare’s insurance exchange subsidies are actually qualified for the aid, until at least 2015.

**Forar**

Tea Party Nation wrote:Barack Obama demanded unconditional surrender from the Republican Party.

He pretty much got it.

The Republican Party has capitulated on the central issue of Obamacare. Mitch McConnell and John Boehner never wanted this fight. In true RINO fashion, they wanted to surrender early and often. ....

In short, the GOP got nothing from their fight. But then again, McConnell, Boehner and the GOP establishment never tried.

With the implosion of the Obamacare roll out, they had the perfect opportunity. The GOP should have been parading real Americans in front of the cameras every day to talk about how they have lost health insurance coverage thanks to Obamacare or how they cannot find full time work thanks to Obamacare.

What did the GOP?

It caved totally and completely. And the GOP leadership does not care.

The government shutdown is pushed back until January and the debt ceiling until February.

Does anyone believe either McConnell or Boehner will have the intestinal fortitude to go to the mat with Obama again? It does not matter what Obama demands, these two will cave, guaranteeing it will pass.

I have been a Republican since I was 13 years old in 1972, putting out yard signs for Richard Nixon.

Don’t call me a Republican today. It is an insult and it just might be fighting words.

Someone's a bit unhappy about this state of affairs.

Cursed RINOs.

**Frazzled**

I'll be frank-what exactly was the game plan here for the Republicans pushing all this?

I can understand if you were pushing for budget changes and using the CR as leverage considering the Senate forgot what the word budget means. But you don't mess with the debt ceiling / default scenario (I agree its a stupid concept and should be gotten rid of).

And you don't use the CR to revoke Obamacare. You could have used ti to modify some probs with Obamacare, and frankly it needs massive tinkering. But come on, the president and the Democratic Party are not going to give up on huis signature piece of legislation. Who thought this was a bright idea???

**Andrew1975**

so anybody got a figure as to what this temper tantrum cost the Tax payers? I know I had a trip to DC ruined because everything was closed, I had to be subjected to shopping in Georgetown with my wife and 2 year old daughter. We should have been at the mall or other monuments.

**Breotan**

Easy E wrote:
It sounds like we have a plan.

However, the wierd thign is that the Republicans get nothign for their tantrum, and are still signing off on the plan. Will this put an end to their "negotiation" tactics forever, or only postpone it until Feb?

Weird thing is that the British press seem to have a more honest analysis of things than FoxNews/NYTimes/HuffingtonPost.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100241757/us-debt-ceiling-crisis-barack-obama-has-won-the-shutdown-his-prize-is-a-lame-duck-presidency/

US debt ceiling crisis – Barack Obama has won the shutdown. His prize is a lame duck presidency

The shutdown is basically over and the President has won. Or, at least, he's won because the Republicans have definitely lost. Not only did they not get what they wanted – that "life or death" delay on Obamacare implementation – but they've given the impression of dragging partisanship to new lows. Obamacare had been passed already, the Supreme Court had okayed it and Obama had won an election on it, yet the GOP was still prepared to bring the country to the brink of ruin to cripple it. When Grover Norquist is saying that the Right went too far (he of the "drown government in the bath tub" fame) then the Right probably went a bit too far.

But there are caveats to that narrative. First, the Republicans aren't the only ones who ought to hang their heads in shame. It was the Democrat-controlled Senate that first rejected the House's bill and so sparked the crisis. It was the President who refused to talk to anyone about it (and went campaigning instead). It was the federal government – even when in shutdown – that behaved like a spoiled child, covering war memorials in fences and trying to stop military priests from saying Mass. And it was the mainstream media that took the side of the President and helped foster the impression that the GOP is run by a bunch of blowhard crazy people. For example, Dave Weigel points out that, contrary to reports, wild child Ted Cruz actually had "no intention" of delaying the critical final vote in the Senate. His image of being Sarah Palin 2.0 is entirely a media myth.

Second, what has Obama really won? He keeps his precious healthcare reform and he gets government open again – but tomorrow morning he'll still have the same gridlocked political system that he had the night before. The shutdown is a rare example of him winning, but remember that this lame duck president has not only had a very simple (and, frankly, inoffensive) gun control bill killed in the Senate but was so spooked by bad poll numbers that he tried to dump responsibility for military action in Syria onto the Congress – before quietly dropping the idea altogether. Any thought that the shutdown payoff will be that he can sail an immigration reform package comfortably through Congress is pure fantasy. This is a broken presidency living out its last few years either holding off Republican attacks or lazily cruising the country on some pointless, endless, fatuous campaign trail. Obama's administration is politically bankrupt.

The talk for the next week will be about how the Tea Party is dead and Republicans must elect a politically correct, middle-of-the-road, unimaginative, establishment, compromising candidate in 2016 (preferably a singing sloth, cos the polls show that Americans just love those). But the reality is that US politics right now is a mess for both Left and Right, and the country is stuck in partisan limbo until the 2014 midterms or even the 2016 presidential election. This is not a Republican problem, it is an American problem.

**whembly**

Frazzled wrote:
I'll be frank-what exactly was the game plan here for the Republicans pushing all this?

I can understand if you were pushing for budget changes and using the CR as leverage considering the Senate forgot what the word budget means. But you don't mess with the debt ceiling / default scenario (I agree its a stupid concept and should be gotten rid of).

And you don't use the CR to revoke Obamacare. You could have used ti to modify some probs with Obamacare, and frankly it needs massive tinkering. But come on, the president and the Democratic Party are not going to give up on huis signature piece of legislation. Who thought this was a bright idea???

They got sucked into the whole Debt Limit thing...

Had they passed a clean Debt Limit bill way before the government shutdown, the House would be in much better position.

*shrugs*

Did anything pass yet? o.O

**Ouze**

Breotan wrote:
Weird thing is that the British press seem to have a more honest analysis of things than FoxNews/NYTimes/HuffingtonPost.

That's an interesting take on the word "honest". Or even, hell, accurate - the Telegraph has been calling Obama a lame duck since July, 2010.

The last paragraph is pretty accurate, though.

**Peregrine**

Frazzled wrote:
I'll be frank-what exactly was the game plan here for the Republicans pushing all this?

The real question is was there a game plan at all, beyond appeasing the people who will run a primary challenge against you out out of a belief that negotiating with the enemy is treason.

**Ouze**

The Telegraph, by way of Breotan wrote:
It was the President who refused to talk to anyone about it (and went campaigning instead). It was the federal government – even when in shutdown – that behaved like a spoiled child, covering war memorials in fences and trying to stop military priests from saying Mass.

You know, I was thinking about this on the drive home, and this one snippet is another perfect example of the real problem with the media (and not just in this country, as it turns out).

The military doesn't have enough chaplains to handle mass for x amount of soldiers, so the military does what they always do and they contract out some priests. Fair enough.

Because of the shutdown, approximately 50 of these holy contractors were furloughed, as were so many other civilians. Reasonable.

But that's never enough for the derp-o-sphere! NEVER! We need to embellish that! Lets go with that they're forbidden from saying mass not that they're just furloughed! No, scratch that. Lets go, as always, for the most possible ridiculous things our viewers might believe: that these priests were threatened with being arrested if they said mass.

Go ahead, google it: "priests risk arrest mass shutdown". All the usual offenders are there. Daily Caller, CNS News, The Blaze, Fox News, The Huffington Post, Infowars, etc.

The actual story, of course, isn't quite that. But why let that stop these purveyors of flim-flam from getting their clicks?

If you read these sites - and there is nothing wrong with that - you really need to read critically, and know that while sometimes there is actual news to be gleaned from them, ultimately these siteshave no respect for your intelligence and ability to critically think, only your ability to like and share.

**BaronIveagh**

Ok, it's ambled it's way through both houses.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24559869

As far as actual costs BBC's published estimate was that it set the US economy back 24 billion dollars.

**Breotan**

BBC.co.uk wrote:"We've got to get out of the habit of governing by crisis," the Democratic president added.

Congress doesn't govern. The President does.

**dogma**

Breotan wrote:
Congress doesn't govern. The President does.

Both Congress and the Executive govern.

**Andrew1975**

the shutdown cost 24 billion dollars? Holy hell! Can we get the republicans to pay for that!

**whembly**

Andrew1975 wrote:
the shutdown cost 24 billion dollars? Holy hell! Can we get the republicans to pay for that!

That's all? o.O

We spend like over 300 billion a month.

**Breotan**

Define "cost 24 billion dollars". Did the debt actually go UP by that much? Or is that simply revenue not collected somehow? Or is in money in service that was supposed to be spent but wasn't? Or is it the money that will be paid to furlowed people who didn't do any work while enjoying their "unexpected vacation"?

**Ouze**

BaronIveagh wrote:
As far as actual costs BBC's published estimate was that it set the US economy back 24 billion dollars.

Is this one of those estimates like how fantasy football or march madness or whatever cost employers eleventy bajillion dollars?

**Forar**

Good thing Harry Reid won't negotiate, as the thread title so cheerfully reminds us.

Seems flipping them the bird worked well enough.

Now let's hope everyone learned their lessons and we can get back to a bit of normaHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Couldn't keep a straight face, see you guys back here in Dec/Jan/Feb when we get to do it all again.

I do so hope they do it again. I want to see if the Republican polling numbers can actually hit negatives.

**Breotan**

dogma wrote:
Breotan wrote:
Congress doesn't govern. The President does.
Both Congress and the Executive govern.

Congress legislates and has some oversight authority but it is the Executive that actually governs.

But let's set aside Government 101 for a moment for this new item straight out of Bat Sh!# Crazy, DC.

http://news.yahoo.com/house-worker-yells-during-vote-escorted-away-030128009--politics.html

House worker yells during vote, escorted away

WASHINGTON (AP) — A woman described by lawmakers and aides as a long-time House stenographer has been removed from the chamber during a vote after she began shouting.

The woman was yelling from the rostrum Wednesday just below where the House presiding officer sits. The microphone she was yelling into was off.

Lawmakers said she was yelling about the House being divided and the devil. Texas Democratic Rep. Joaquin Castro said she had a crazed look on her face.

As she was led into an elevator by security, she was heard to shout, "This is not one nation under God. It never was."

She also screamed, "Praise be to God, Lord Jesus Christ."

The outburst occurred while the House was voting on legislation ending the government shutdown and extending the federal debt limit.

Proof that the House of Representatives is little more than a three-ring circus anymore.

Forar wrote:
I want to see if the Republican polling numbers can actually hit negatives.

Missed the details on how President Obama's poll numbers were affected, did you?

You also missed the part where Mitch McConnell gets nearly $3 billion for a Kentucky dam project. I'd say there was at least one winner to come out of all this.

**dogma**

Breotan wrote:
Congress legislates and has some oversight authority but it is the Executive that actually governs.

Per no reasonable definition of the word "govern" can you claim that Congress does not.

The act of legislating is government. The act of overseeing something is government. Yes, the Executive executes legislation passed by the Legislature (hence the name), but that does not render it the sole governing body of the government.; such a claim is ludicrous.

**Forar**

Breotan wrote:
Missed the details on how President Obama's poll numbers were affected, did you?

Nope, the list of things polling better than House Republicans is much funnier.

You also missed the part where Mitch McConnell gets nearly $3 billion for a Kentucky dam project. I'd say there was at least one winner to come out of all this.

Also knew about that.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics-live/liveblog/live-updates-the-shutdown-9/?id=a9f2f203-96e6-4943-baf1-bc7ae85af94f

Funny, according to that, Obama actually requested the funding.

So, apparently your thanks should be directed to the President!