The Longer the Shutdown the better for the American People

[Sergeant Bob]

Obama had similar numbers during much of his 2012 re-election campaign.  And yet he was re-elected handily.

The "faithful" will always vote for him or his like regardless of their opinion of his job performance, as long as it will keep the evil (including losers such as Romney and McCain) Republicans out of office. But then, the Republican faithful will keep voting for "Romney" and "McCain".

[TommyGunn]

The "faithful" will always vote for him or his like regardless of their opinion of his job performance, as long as it will keep the evil (including losers such as Romney and McCain) Republicans out of office. But then, the Republican faithful will keep voting for "Romney" and "McCain".

Apparently not ...both McCain & Romney lost.

[Sergeant Bob]

Apparently not ...both McCain & Romney lost.

The problem is, there are less of the "faithful"  (including myself) now than there were in previous years. Add to that the fact that Romney and McCain both sucked with bells on.

[brimic]

Add to that the fact that Romney and McCain both sucked with bells on.

I read that as "Romney and McCain both sucked balls."
Which coincidentally is accurate as well.

[Sergeant Bob]

I read that as "Romney and McCain both sucked balls."
Which coincidentally is accurate as well.

It's code!

[TommyGunn]

The problem is, there are less of the "faithful"  (including myself) now than there were in previous years. Add to that the fact that Romney and McCain both sucked with bells on.

I read that as "Romney and McCain both sucked balls."
Which coincidentally is accurate as well.

It's code!

No wonder we're stuck with four more years of President Empty Suit Obama.

[Sergeant Bob]

No wonder we're stuck with four more years of President Empty Suit Obama.

You know, one could be mistaken into thinking you do "get it"!
 
 

[TommyGunn]

You know, one could be mistaken into thinking you do "get it"!
 
 

Oh, don't worry, I "get it."   And you "get it."  We're ALL going to "GET IT" before O's last term is up!


I am &**^&%^%&^ aware that there were plenty of people who did not vote for Romney because they thought he was some sort of milquetoast conservative republican, or because he'd done "Romneycare" in Massachusetts and mistakenly thought it was similar to Obamacare, or whatever.  And those who disdained McCain in '08 because he has been labeled a RINO in many quarters.
When are we going to get our collective heads out of our butts as republicans and GET IT that there is NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT CANDIDATE other than the one we see in the mirror when we shave?
We don't like candidate A 'cause he is the "lesser evil" so we vote for the imaginary Angel who doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades of being elected so we wind up getting the vilest devil in office.


Well, we get the government we so richly deserve.

[brimic]

I voted for both McCain and Romney (They did not get my primary votes). I still feel dirty for voting for McCain.

[erictank]

Oh, don't worry, I "get it."   And you "get it."  We're ALL going to "GET IT" before O's last term is up!


I am &**^&%^%&^ aware that there were plenty of people who did not vote for Romney because they thought he was some sort of milquetoast conservative republican, or because he'd done "Romneycare" in Massachusetts and mistakenly thought it was similar to Obamacare, or whatever.  And those who disdained McCain in '08 because he has been labeled a RINO in many quarters.

YOU'RE sick of this??? Back of the line is thataway.

When you continue voting for "more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other", by strange coincidence, we get more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other. Your grudging vote for more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other counts EXACTLY the same as one from a "Whoohoo! This guy's EXACTLY what I want, in every single little detail!", and is taken as such by more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other - thus ENCOURAGING more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other.

If you never dare vote for someone who's *NOT* more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other out of some misguided fear of "throwing your vote away", then you've no moral right to complain about getting what you voted for. You'll never get different if you always vote for the same. And, really? The best the R's were willing to offer this last time 'round was the guy who couldn't beat the guy who couldn't beat Obama? This was their grand strategy for victory? Their savior? Puh-LEEEEZE.

If you, or they, want my vote, you'll damn well EARN it, or you'll do without. And neither the R's nor the D's has offered anything worth my vote. To me, that's one of the biggest problems with the two statist wings of the Modern American Political Machine - they both think that they ALREADY OWN my vote, and their adherents often seem to suffer under the same delusion. You're all indignant over my refusing to vote for the same crap politicians who are driving us at breakneck speed towards a cliff? Get your guys to offer someone better, someone willing to actually TURN THE FREAKING WHEEL, rather than back off a fraction of a hair on the accelerator, and you might actually persuade me to vote for that person. Matters not to me whether we go over the cliff at 125mph or 128 - we're still in for a long drop and a short stop either way.

When are we going to get our collective heads out of our butts as republicans and GET IT that there is NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT CANDIDATE other than the one we see in the mirror when we shave?
We don't like candidate A 'cause he is the "lesser evil" so we vote for the imaginary Angel who doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades of being elected so we wind up getting the vilest devil in office.

And without the quest for the "perfect" (really, just for someone who's ACTUALLY better than the status quo, than the establishment, but that's too much like fact to be permitted in a discussion like this...), there'd never *BE* any "good". Offer us something better, and you might get the support your side so gladly THREW AWAY during Perpetual Election Cycle '12 (and '10, and '08, and...). But that's on you guys. You want better? Vote for it.

Well, we get the government we so richly deserve.

Those of us who DID dare vote for something different are getting the government those who voted for more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other deserve. And we hate that worse than you do.

[Scout26]

Meanwhile in DC.

If we hit the Oct 17 date and there's no deal on the debt limit, looks like instant 20% cuts across the board.  I'm good with that.   I don't see Obama/Reid budging on Obamacare, and Boehner wants spending cuts tied to the debt increase.   SuperSequester II here we come.  Obama may regret digging his heels in. 


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/6/debt-fight-is-likely-to-escalate-shutdown-showdown/

[Scout26]

I hope all the R's read this.  The strategy of how to win both in DC and with the public.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/6/clancy-how-the-gop-can-win-the-shutdown/

[TommyGunn]

YOU'RE sick of this??? Back of the line is thataway.

When you continue voting for "more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other", by strange coincidence, we get more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other. Your grudging vote for more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other counts EXACTLY the same as one from a "Whoohoo! This guy's EXACTLY what I want, in every single little detail!", and is taken as such by more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other - thus ENCOURAGING more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other.

If you never dare vote for someone who's *NOT* more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other out of some misguided fear of "throwing your vote away", then you've no moral right to complain about getting what you voted for. You'll never get different if you always vote for the same. And, really? The best the R's were willing to offer this last time 'round was the guy who couldn't beat the guy who couldn't beat Obama? This was their grand strategy for victory? Their savior? Puh-LEEEEZE.

If you, or they, want my vote, you'll damn well EARN it, or you'll do without. And neither the R's nor the D's has offered anything worth my vote. To me, that's one of the biggest problems with the two statist wings of the Modern American Political Machine - they both think that they ALREADY OWN my vote, and their adherents often seem to suffer under the same delusion. You're all indignant over my refusing to vote for the same crap politicians who are driving us at breakneck speed towards a cliff? Get your guys to offer someone better, someone willing to actually TURN THE FREAKING WHEEL, rather than back off a fraction of a hair on the accelerator, and you might actually persuade me to vote for that person. Matters not to me whether we go over the cliff at 125mph or 128 - we're still in for a long drop and a short stop either way.

And without the quest for the "perfect" (really, just for someone who's ACTUALLY better than the status quo, than the establishment, but that's too much like fact to be permitted in a discussion like this...), there'd never *BE* any "good". Offer us something better, and you might get the support your side so gladly THREW AWAY during Perpetual Election Cycle '12 (and '10, and '08, and...). But that's on you guys. You want better? Vote for it.

Those of us who DID dare vote for something different are getting the government those who voted for more-of-the-same, can't-hardly-tell-one-from-the-other deserve. And we hate that worse than you do.

"You want better?  Vote for it.  I did --- in 2012, 2008, 2004, 2000, 1996, 1992.... 
The problem with the "quest for the perfect"  is it makes the perfect the enemy of the good. 
I'll say it again: the ONLY PERFECT candidate is what we see in the mirror.   Unless YOU run for office you will always find something about a candidate you disagree with. 
Despite what all the libertarian yahoos say Romney was not the same -- he disagreed with Obamacare and had promised on more than one occasion he would do what was within presidential power to repeal it.  But because so many yahoos DID think he was just "more of the same yadda yadda" they stayed home.  If the same people who'd voted for McCain had all come to vote for Romney then he would have won in 2012.

[dogmush]

I don't want perfect, I'd settle for good.

ACA or not, Romney was IS a big gov statist that would expand government and curtail freedoms.  He didn't deserve any votes.

Honestly, faced with the ACA and the Patriot Act side by side, Obama has done less damage to freedom then Bush.

[TommyGunn]

I don't want perfect, I'd settle for good.

ACA or not, Romney was IS a big gov statist that would expand government and curtail freedoms.  He didn't deserve any votes.

Honestly, faced with the ACA and the Patriot Act side by side, Obama has done less damage to freedom then Bush.

I disagree with that last statement --- and let's keep in mind one thing:  Bush is finished.
Obama isn't.

[dogmush]

Agree to disagree, but the ACA hasn't molested any kids in airports.

[TommyGunn]

Agree to disagree, but the ACA hasn't molested any kids in airports.

Is that the only danger they face?
 

[tokugawa]

I think the credit valve is going to involuntarily slam SHUT in the next 3 months.  And this is the beginning of it.

 It gets closer every day- Denninger lays it out quite nicely. For thirty years they have been able to roll the debt and add more as rates dropped. Now we are bouncing along the bottom and this game is coming to an end.  http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=224935
 

[erictank]

"You want better?  Vote for it.  I did --- in 2012, 2008, 2004, 2000, 1996, 1992.... 
The problem with the "quest for the perfect"  is it makes the perfect the enemy of the good. 
I'll say it again: the ONLY PERFECT candidate is what we see in the mirror.   Unless YOU run for office you will always find something about a candidate you disagree with. 
Despite what all the libertarian yahoos say Romney was not the same -- he disagreed with Obamacare and had promised on more than one occasion he would do what was within presidential power to repeal it.  But because so many yahoos DID think he was just "more of the same yadda yadda" they stayed home.  If the same people who'd voted for McCain had all come to vote for Romney then he would have won in 2012.

And if you think this is a "quest for the perfect", you're gravely mistaken. Like dogmush, I want something better. Paul wasn't perfect, by a long shot. Johnson wasn't either. For my money, and more importantly for my vote, either one was head, shoulders, and beyond better than either of the candidates for the Modern American Political Machine in '12.

The fact that McCain's supporters did not come out to vote for Romney (or, for that matter, anyone else) is a failure which is properly laid at the feet of the Romney campaign, and nowhere else. He failed to persuade them to vote for him. Which is REALLY damning, because it truly was the Republicans' race to lose at that point, and they did.

Don't mistake me - by no means am I claiming that we're better off with 0. But like I said, I see basically no difference between hitting that cliff edge at 125 versus 128, and nothing I saw in the '12 campaign demonstrated to me that Romney had any intention of hitting the brakes, let alone turning the steering wheel.

[DustinD]

I don't see the libertarian candidates as perfect, yet I still vote for them. If everyone voted for what they wanted we would have broken this cycle decades ago and not be in this mess.

All I ask from the republicans is that that they work to lower taxes and spending, and make government intrusions smaller. That is an easy standard and I have and will vote for them when they meet that low standard.

[Scout26]

And let the race baiting begin.  Let's see what happens if you philosophically disagree with Obama. 

"New Confederacy"  - Check  (Wasn't the first United States, from 1776-1787 a "Confederacy", I recall something about "The Articles of Confederation".)
"Slavery" reference - Check
"Assassinate a President" - Check
"Jim Crow" - Check
"Voter Suppression" via the Supreme court rolling back Section 5 of the Voting Right Act -Check
"Dred Scott Case" - *DING*DING*DING*  Triple extra bonus points for working that in.
And the capper "Tea Party = Jefferson Davis" for the win.

www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/colbert-king-the-tea-party-resurrects-the-spirit-of-the-old-confederacy/2013/10/04/95b37f6e-2c7b-11e3-97a3-ff2758228523_story.html

Yep, Thoughtcrime.

[TommyGunn]

And if you think this is a "quest for the perfect", you're gravely mistaken. Like dogmush, I want something better. Paul wasn't perfect, by a long shot. Johnson wasn't either. For my money, and more importantly for my vote, either one was head, shoulders, and beyond better than either of the candidates for the Modern American Political Machine in '12.

The fact that McCain's supporters did not come out to vote for Romney (or, for that matter, anyone else) is a failure which is properly laid at the feet of the Romney campaign, and nowhere else. He failed to persuade them to vote for him. Which is REALLY damning, because it truly was the Republicans' race to lose at that point, and they did.

Don't mistake me - by no means am I claiming that we're better off with 0. But like I said, I see basically no difference between hitting that cliff edge at 125 versus 128, and nothing I saw in the '12 campaign demonstrated to me that Romney had any intention of hitting the brakes, let alone turning the steering wheel.

I agree Romney did fail -- but then, so did the voters who stayed home. 

"Don't mistake me - by no means am I claiming that we're better off with 0. But like I said, I see basically no difference between hitting that cliff edge at 125 versus 128, and nothing I saw in the '12 campaign demonstrated to me that Romney had any intention of hitting the brakes, let alone turning the steering wheel."
You failed to see him straighten out Massachusetts' economy?   You failed to see him get ...what was it the Olympics, straightened out?   
 

Romney had a excellent record of making silk purses out of sow's ears. 
But I guess since his name isn't "Ron Paul"   some people just will not "see."

Romney, for that matter, badly miscalculated what he was up against; the democrat machine did a superb job of using the interwebz and modern tech to get out the vote for the dems in places that few if any would have  expected. 
But this was not really so much a Romney failure as a republican failure -- and the repubs had better get in high gear playing catch-up because we're one year + little away from the 2014 midterms.

BTW I like Ron Paul and if we had a country to start from scratch he'd be perfect.  But we're not living in 1776 we're living in 2013.  I do think his son Rand Paul is a little saner, though.

[cordex]

Romney, for that matter, badly miscalculated what he was up against; the democrat machine did a superb job of using the interwebz and modern tech to get out the vote for the dems in places that few if any would have  expected. 
But this was not really so much a Romney failure as a republican failure -- and the repubs had better get in high gear playing catch-up because we're one year + little away from the 2014 midterms.

That was the mistake that McCain made. If the Republicans made it again with Romney, "fool me twice ... don't get fooled again."

[TommyGunn]

That was the mistake that McCain made. If the Republicans made it again with Romney, "fool me twice ... don't get fooled again."

No, what the demos did in '12 was worlds ahead and different than what they did in '08.

[Sergeant Bob]

Oh, don't worry, I "get it."   And you "get it."  We're ALL going to "GET IT" before O's last term is up!


I am &**^&%^%&^ aware that there were plenty of people who did not vote for Romney because they thought he was some sort of milquetoast conservative republican, or because he'd done "Romneycare" in Massachusetts and mistakenly thought it was similar to Obamacare, or whatever.  And those who disdained McCain in '08 because he has been labeled a RINO in many quarters.
When are we going to get our collective heads out of our butts as republicans and GET IT that there is NO SUCH THING AS A PERFECT CANDIDATE other than the one we see in the mirror when we shave?
We don't like candidate A 'cause he is the "lesser evil" so we vote for the imaginary Angel who doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hades of being elected so we wind up getting the vilest devil in office.


Well, we get the government we so richly deserve.

Ya know, I did vote for both McCain and Romney. I did it one handed cause the other hand was holding my nose. Look what that got me. I voted for Bush as well and that sure didn't do the country a whole lot of good.

So don't bother telling me who I need to vote for.

I'd rather tilt at windmills than keep voting for Democrat lite. I used to feel the same way as you but I am finished with voting for the status quo or worse.

Voting for the fauxpublicans is like throwing out the anchor and forgetting to attach it to the rope.