Shut Down

[jerrymrc]

Folks getting paid by the government should be providing a benefit to the majority of people paying them. If we're paying you we should be doing it for our benefit. I don't consider tying red tape in neat bows or determining who to send tax money to a benefit. Thats the view I and many others have of gov employes, perhaps because we have little interaction and therefore see little benefit.

Don't interact with the public. All I do is take care of the troops. I also try and save your tax $$$ from contractors and salesmen that think the .gov is nothing but something to try and take advantage of for their own gain.

Just like many subjects people seem to have a view that one = all. This has come up before and it always reminds me of some KKK lynch mob. In my little world all this has done is to take away support and services for the soldiers and there families. Those of us remaining will do the best we can. I will just leave it at that.

I have issues with some .gov agency's as well. I just got my tax return yesterday that was filed on time. Should I go on a rant about all govt workers should be fired? So one person has an issue with a car repair should we all go out and find the first dealership and kill all the mechanics?

Just a thought as I will abstain from further posting on the topic.

[roberth]

I fully understand how much you guys hate all of us but 3 combat vets were let go today in my shop. 2 of them are board members. Just a thought since it seems that many of you seem to think we all should just put a gun in our mouth and pull the trigger because of things we have no control over. Have a nice day.

I don't control where they choose to spend money.

The clowns in charge chose to spend my tax dollars on welfare recipients, not on your guys. I'd rather see your guys working than some illegal alien getting another free meal. You can't blame us for that one.

There are 2 enormous problems with the federal government, one is the onerous tax burden carried by 50 percent of eligible taxpayers and the second is the distribution of those funds to groups and people that did nothing to earn them.

[Aloha_Shooter]

That message was lost months ago. The "radical tea part faction" has been holding the house hostage while pushing their agenda.

This one of the big reasons they really should not have let it get to this point. (R) is going to take all the blame for any downside.

That's a load of equine manure. The "radical" Tea Party faction has been pushing the House and Senate to do the jobs they are assigned under Article II of the Constitution. Their agenda is quite simply to restore a balanced financial picture and planning to the federal government. The Republicans are certainly horrible at messaging; part of the reason for that is that most of the people good at spinning senseless crap with no basis in reality are liberals. Republicans are certainly going to get the blame for any downside but they've taken that for the last 50 years even when the pain was caused by Democrats.

The worst thing that could happen is continuing to cave to the demands of the toddlers following Obama and Reid.

[merl]

That's a load of equine manure. The "radical" Tea Party faction has been pushing the House and Senate to do the jobs they are assigned under Article II of the Constitution. Their agenda is quite simply to restore a balanced financial picture and planning to the federal government. The Republicans are certainly horrible at messaging; part of the reason for that is that most of the people good at spinning senseless crap with no basis in reality are liberals. Republicans are certainly going to get the blame for any downside but they've taken that for the last 50 years even when the pain was caused by Democrats.

The worst thing that could happen is continuing to cave to the demands of the toddlers following Obama and Reid.

The second sentence of my post is what is repeated everywhere, thats why it went in. That is the message and point that this is reinforcing.

If the goal is really smaller, lower budget government then a budget that has any hope of becoming law has to actually be passed. Everybody with half a brain knows that a bill with "defund the president's signature bill, the bill he'll be remembered for" Will Not Pass. Even if somehow it had enough sweetener to pass the Senate the president will veto any repeal of his signature bill. Even getting the government shut down didn't stop it as it is classed non-discretionary.
Put it in the first version to make a political point, fine. But when it comes back with that section removed send back something loaded with other cuts everywhere. Score a second round of points with all the other cuts. Beating the same dead horse doesn't reinforce your point.
You may well be right that nobody up there wants smaller government. The (R) side sure didn't when Bush was in office and they held the reins, they could have made a difference then. Nobody is willing to to deal with the fact that either there are going to be massive cuts to the entitlement side or massive hikes on the middle class to balance things out.

[RblDiver]

edit, Popped on over to Economist and what is on the top of the front page?
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democ...13/10/shutdown
[B]That is UK press saying the message battle is lost.

Seeing as how The Economist is very left-wing, this isn't surprising.

(Hell, they once advocated getting rid of the House of Lords for a very dumb reason. They were arguing that people whose specialties were in, for example (since I can't remember specifics) the military shouldn't be making health care decisions. I wanted to yell at them, "So, rather than have a body with a diverse skillset, it's better to have a body whose only skill is politics?")

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

Seeing as how The Economist is very left-wing, this isn't surprising.

(Hell, they once advocated getting rid of the House of Lords for a very dumb reason. They were arguing that people whose specialties were in, for example (since I can't remember specifics) the military shouldn't be making health care decisions. I wanted to yell at them, "So, rather than have a body with a diverse skillset, it's better to have a body whose only skill is politics?")

Feels like it didn't used to be nearly so bad a decade or 15 years back, but I agree.
For that sort of thing, WSJ only for me.

[RblDiver]

Feels like it didn't used to be nearly so bad a decade or 15 years back, but I agree.

Heh, well I haven't a clue about that, I've only been reading for 2 years or so :P

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

Heh, well I haven't a clue about that, I've only been reading for 2 years or so :P

Switch it up for WSJ, my friend. You'll find the articles better and the writers more informed.

[spqrzilla]

The Democrats messaging is breaking down with stupid stunts like closing the WWII Memorial

[hatidua]

Gov't Shutdown of 2013 = unequivocal political gift to Hillary.