Key “defund” backer: Let’s be realistic, we can’t repeal ObamaCare until 2017

posted at 1:21 pm on October 16, 2013 by Allahpundit

Via the Corner, it’s Michael Needham of Heritage Action, arguably the single biggest driver of the “defund” effort besides Ted Cruz himself. Question: If repeal is obviously impossible because, after all, Democrats control two-thirds of the lawmaking branches of the government, why wasn’t “defund” also impossible for the same reason? I don’t know. If you’re willing to risk serious political injury to yourself by shutting down the government for weeks to extract a crucially important concession, why lower your ask to “defund” instead of going whole hog for repeal? It’s a matter of not blinking, right?

The answer, I guess, is that “defund” theoretically might have been more appealing to red-state Democrats like Pryor and Begich than the nuclear option of repeal would be. All the defunders were asking for was a year without money for the law, they could argue, not permanent neutralization. Given the problems with Healthcare.gov, who could be against that? Even if the “defund” caucus had won every conservative Democratic vote, though, they still wouldn’t have had nearly enough to pass a “defund” bill over a filibuster staged by the rest of Reid’s caucus. It would have been a fun, fleeting embarrassment for the White House — “Five Dems cross aisle to oppose money for ObamaCare!” — but then, as the shutdown dragged on, those Democrats would have swung back to Reid in partisan solidarity and in the name of showing voters back home that they wanted the shutdown to end ASAP. Beyond that, it was probably unrealistic to expect any Dem, including highly vulnerable ones like Pryor, to vote for any anti-ObamaCare measure, no matter how small. Pryor may come from a red state but his only chance at holding his seat is heavy Democratic turnout and you can imagine how the true believers on the left in Arkansas would have reacted to him knifing them in the back by joining the “defunders.” In fact, if you believe Begich, one of the theoretically gettable votes for the right, no one in a position of power including Cruz ever personally lobbied him to switch sides on defunding. So if “defund” was more likely than repeal, it was more likely in the sense that an 85-yard field goal is more likely than a 90-yard one.

And now here we are:

There are no policy concessions from the Democrats (income verification is already part of Obamacare). There are no procedural concessions from the Democrats. Just the opposite, in fact.

Democrats managed to get the budget conference they’ve been pursuing for six months. They got a CR of the length they wanted and ending before the next sequestration cuts rather than six-month CR that Sen. Susan Collins proposed. They got a debt-ceiling increase all the way into February. This is far beyond what Democrats thought possible on Sept. 30…

Going forward, not only will Republicans be afraid to shut down the government or threaten the debt ceiling again during this Congress, but if Republicans somehow end up doing it anyway, Democrats will be unafraid of the fight. As Democrats see it, if Republicans want to give a shutdown or a default another shot closer to the 2014 election, well, that’s great news for Democratic congressional candidates.

That’s Ezra Klein, but he’s right about the last part. “Defund” was always about using the shutdown as leverage, not so much the debt ceiling, but after this humiliating rout Boehner and McConnell won’t be willing to play chicken with the debt limit again for a long time, if ever. They might as well raise the ceiling for three or four years instead of three or four months. Their bluff’s been called; they’re clearly unwilling to hit the ceiling — rightly so — so there’s no sense pretending anymore. Essentially, this process convinced Democrats that they’re the ones who’ll win if they just Don’t Blink.

Two thoughts in closing. One: Why did Heritage Action oppose Boehner’s final bill yesterday? The bill was, no doubt, a feeble compromise compared to the lofty ambitions of the “defund” movement, but the only alternative at that point was an even lamer Democratic-written bill in the Senate. By opposing Boehner, Heritage all but guaranteed that he wouldn’t have the votes to pass it, which ensured that Reid would dictate the final terms of the settlement. Where’s the logic in that? Two: Does it matter at all that shutting down the government didn’t prevent the funding of ObamaCare? The only way to achieve that was to pass a “defund” bill, which, per the above, was all but impossible from the start. All the shutdown did was freeze a few discretionary parts of the budget; the key appropriations for O-Care aren’t among those parts. That’s not necessarily a bad thing in hindsight — having the Healthcare.gov catastrophe start on time and fail epically will do much more to push the White House towards considering delay than the shutdown did. But even that comes with potential bad news: How many low-information voters out there incorrectly believe that it’s the shutdown, not Obama’s and HHS’s incompetence, that’s responsible for the health-care website disaster? Hmmmm.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Bull$hit. If Obama cared about the debt ceiling, then he would defund Obamacare in order to avoid it.

Can you expand your brain just enough to understand this concept.

blink on October 16, 2013 at 3:49 PM

Obama himself doesn’t have to face the voters ever again so he doesn’t care about anything except his legacy, and his legacy is Obamacare. Single payer has been a liberal dream for almost 70 years and this is a big first step in that direction. He will never, EVER do any harm to it.

Can you not understand this extremely simple concept?

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 3:58 PM

But the ability to stop anything new is different than the ability to undo the damage that’s been done. We have the power to do the former but not the latter.

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 3:45 PM

Finding a way to undo damage done to our country in the past six years is an existential necessity. Conceding that it is impossible is no different than willfully consigning ourselves to oblivion.

ElectricPhase on October 16, 2013 at 4:06 PM

We are 16 days into a ‘catastrophic’ government shutdown that has impacted you how? Only about 17% of the federal government is shutdown.

Like with the ‘economic disaster’ of the sequester which had $85B not being spent out of $3.6T of total federal spending, what pain that was felt was entirely created by the WH / Administration which sought to create as much pain as possible as opposed to their fiduciary responsibilities to minimize the pain as much as possible.

They closed national parks and monuments – spending more in DC to close open venue monuments than they likely ‘saved’. My personal impact resulted in taking visiting family to the Reagan Presidential Library to find that the library and museum, majority funded by a private foundation, was ordered closed by the Administration. Still was able to walk the grounds and visit the AFOne Pavilion.

Beyond these efforts to gin up angst among the people, what real price was paid closing the 17% of the federal government deemed ‘non-essential’?

Then we have the arbitrary (as ITGuy has posted so well about) decision by the Administration / SecTreas to define the ‘debt ceiling’ deadline date and then talk about the impending ‘default’ of the nation when in reality all this was – to put into words we all can understand:

Having the House vote to deny a credit card limit increase to Barack Obama to use on the national credit card because Barack Obama had added nearly 50% to the credit card limit over the last years. Barack Obama was only making the minimum monthly payment and revenues do not appear to increasing in order to halt the dependency on new borrowing – or Barack Obama’s ability to pay off what is already on the credit card.

In response to the denial of his credit limit increase, Barack Obama then threatened to stop making even the minimum monthly payments even though he still had plenty of revenue coming in to cover those payments.

And the fault for all of this are those who decide to decline Barack Obama’s request for a credit limit increase?

Would anyone, including your bank, buy this if you did it to them?

ITGuy is right – this farcical example of brinkmanship needed to be called…but because of the Vichy Republicans, it will not be.

…and despite the efforts of the Vichy Republicans, credit rating agencies will still downgrade the US because the debt / spending trajectory problems remain fundamentally unaddressed.

Athos on October 16, 2013 at 4:06 PM

Finding a way to undo damage done to our country in the past six years is an existential necessity. Conceding that it is impossible is no different than willfully consigning ourselves to oblivion.

ElectricPhase on October 16, 2013 at 4:06 PM

But is it impossible at least until the next election. That’s what happens when you’ve got a Senate majority who is cheering for destruction.

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 4:08 PM

GOP will never repeal or defund obamacare; they have turned into democrat lite and enjoy spending other people’s money way too much

burserker on October 16, 2013 at 4:09 PM

Brit Hume: The Tea Party Forced a Major Fight on the Budget and ObamaCare Precisely Because The Establishment Didn’t…

The GOP Establishment didn’t want the fight. They didn’t want to fight. They wanted to kick the can down the road yet again. To go along to get along. To keep the status quo in place so that they are still liked…still feted and interviewed by the lamestream media.

That’s why the GOP Establishment is being held in contempt. They talked the talk but wouldn’t walk the walk. They wouldn’t fight – even if the odds were long.

As far as I am concerned, they’ve abdicated their claim to leadership because they have refused to lead.

Athos on October 16, 2013 at 4:15 PM

Great. So, if Obama doesn’t fear a debt ceiling limit, then why should we?

Seriously, if Obama doesn’t care about the possibility of the house burning to the ground, then why should we?

Just admit that you’re too scared of being blamed for something – which means that Obama can simply threaten anything he wants and cowards like you will want to cave.

blink on October 16, 2013 at 4:06 PM

Because, unlike Obama, everyone in Congress has to face the voters again at some point in the future, and that’s when the liberal media kicks into gear with stories about how the GOP gleefully burned the house down.

Obama doesn’t get whatever he wants, it’s that his immunity from public opinion means that things that threaten his image or popularity don’t concern him so they’re no longer realistic means to attack him and his agenda. To reiterate: we are powerful when it comes to stopping new laws but powerless when it comes to repealing existing ones, and the threat of being personally blamed for anything bad that happens is no longer one of Obama’s concerns.

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 4:17 PM

The arbitrary debt ceiling would have been hit. What would Obama have done? Please provide an answer.

blink on October 16, 2013 at 4:10 PM

Exactly. It would have been hit and nothing would have happened because there is enough money coming in to service the debt, which equals no default. This would have shown the dems to be agenda driven liers.
Now, because of gop cowardice, when it comes up again in a few months, Obama can act like the wise parent scolding the bratty child and state, “We’re NOT going through THAT again.”

Mimzey on October 16, 2013 at 4:18 PM

Impossible?

So what would have happened if the House had held firm?

The arbitrary debt ceiling would have been hit. What would Obama have done? Please provide an answer.

blink on October 16, 2013 at 4:10 PM

Obama would have found the nearest TV camera and loudly blamed the Republicans while the stock market collapsed and his media sycophants carried his water. And on the off chance the people finally woke up and blamed Obama and his popularity tanked he wouldn’t care because Obamacare would still be the law of the land while the media machine kept pelting the LIVs with horror stories of human suffering because of those evil Republicans.

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 4:20 PM

When the credit rating agencies take their next downgrade of the US sovereign debt credit ratings, because of the unsustainable spending trajectory we are on, and our government’s abject failing to address this real crisis, Barack Obama and his flacks will be the first to the media to blame the GOP and the government shutdown for the downgrade.

It will be immaterial whatever the rating agencies say in their press releases over the downgrade, just like it was in the fall of 2011 when the US was first downgraded. The meme will be set that it’s the fault of the GOP / Tea Party caucus even though this is a complete lie.

That’s how the ‘Big Lie’ works – and when it is not immediately and aggressively confronted – perception then starts to define reality as opposed to reality defining and correcting perception.

Too many in the GOP establishment are more afraid and intimidated by the lamestream media than they are angered by the intellectual and ethical bankruptcy of the lamestream media. They forget that no matter how they are ‘admired’ by the lamestream media, if they run against a progressive, they will be demagogued and attacked because they aren’t a real progressive.

The Vichy Republicans are that because they defeat themselves before they even fight – spending more time and energy on justifying their surrender than reaching deep and finding their principles to stand on. They will not stand up to the bullies or the bullying.

Athos on October 16, 2013 at 4:34 PM

What would have still been the law of the land? How would Obama have paid for Obamacare without being able to raise the debt ceiling?

blink on October 16, 2013 at 4:28 PM

There is no precedent for breaching the debt ceiling so Obama and the Treasury department get to make it up as they go along and pay for what they can with what tax revenues there are as they come in. Call me crazy but I would suspect they will direct the Treasury to make sure that keeping Obamacare funded would be one of their priorities.

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 4:43 PM

Obama would have found the nearest TV camera and loudly blamed the Republicans while the stock market collapsed and his media sycophants carried his water. And on the off chance the people finally woke up and blamed Obama and his popularity tanked he wouldn’t care because Obamacare would still be the law of the land while the media machine kept pelting the LIVs with horror stories of human suffering because of those evil Republicans.

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 4:20 PM

Ahhh so what you are saying is the GOP can never win, so why fight. You do realize that after Obama, there will be some other cult of personality Dem that will enthrall the media into blaming the GOP. Apparently if we can get blamed by the media, that means the GOP should never fight according to you.

melle1228 on October 16, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Really? So, you’re saying that the ONLY reason to fear a debt ceiling limit is because Congress has to face voters?

Do you only fear your house being burned to the ground because you might get blamed for it?

There is risk for the GOP. There is no risk for Obama, who has no reason to compromise. That’s a bad deal.

Yes, he does – from people like you. Obama threatens to burn a house to the ground, so you give him everything that he wants.

I’ll try this again….

That’s not true. Stop claiming this. If the House can be cowered into giving Obama what he wanted, then Obama could have been cowered into giving the House what they wanted.

blink on October 16, 2013 at 4:26 PM

It’s not “giving Obama what he wants”, it’s Obama not giving us what we want. Obama won’t give us what we want because we have no leverage against him (that whole re-election thing again), and he wants to be remembered by the liberal intellectual elite as the man who put us on the road to single payer.

Is it news to you that a liberal would inflict pain on the American people in order to see their socialist utopian dreams come to fruition?

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 4:49 PM

Ahhh so what you are saying is the GOP can never win, so why fight. You do realize that after Obama, there will be some other cult of personality Dem that will enthrall the media into blaming the GOP. Apparently if we can get blamed by the media, that means the GOP should never fight according to you.

melle1228 on October 16, 2013 at 4:47 PM

The GOP can win a fight if it’s about new legislation (cap and tax, amnesty, etc.) but if it’s about repealing something already signed into law they can’t, at least not until the next election. I don’t like it but that’s the way it is.

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 4:51 PM

Ok, so Obama would have withheld social security checks in order to fund Obamacare? Or would he have fired half the military? Please tell me where Obama would cut spending if he had to balance the budget?

blink on October 16, 2013 at 4:48 PM

None of us knows exactly what he would do but if you think he’s putting Obamacare on the chopping block first then you’re dreaming. He cut Medicare by $500 billion already, what’s to stop him from doing it again?

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 4:55 PM

That’s what infuriates me about all this. In 2010, the rallying cry was to give the Republicans back the House and make John Boehner the Speaker(the Senate was a longshot to anyone not named Dick Morris). Then the GOP could fight back against the Obama agenda. Well, we gave them the House and promptly got nothing in return.

With all respect, but I think you’re wrong about this, or at least have wrong expectations. In fact Boehner’s house has stymied any new rancorous legislation from passing. That’s because in controlling a portion of government, you in essence have a veto. But nothing more.

Controlling just the house does not allow Boehner to affirmatively change anything – just impede further change. So yes, Boehner and the House has fought back against the Democratic agenda – just not pushed it back. They can hold the line. If you want them to do more, work harder for a GOP house and senate.

limecat on October 16, 2013 at 5:03 PM

It’s time to push back and call their bluff.

2. Is it news for you that pain on the American people is already here and going to get worse? Why not take a stand now?

blink on October 16, 2013 at 4:56 PM

It does seem to me that in divided government, he who desires the status quo has the upper hand. Right now, Democrats desire the status quo more than Republicans do. So I think there’s a built in strategic advantage right now for Democrats.

I agree with you that it’s time to take a stand, but I also think that this is too important to do shabbily. We must first pick our battlefields. Take it for what it’s worth, but I think that our time is better spent working an outside strategy right now (education, citizens convincing other citizens, etc) rather than focusing on the inside game. Right now, Republicans can stalemate Obama until the next election. They can’t do better until another election gives them a better position.

The thing to do is to get working on that election.

limecat on October 16, 2013 at 5:11 PM

Yes, it’s giving Obama what he wants. It doesn’t matter how you phrase it.

Good grief. Refusing to raise the debt ceiling was leverage.

1. Of course not. I’m tired of liberals being able to the threat of it to get everything that they want because cowards like you are too afraid of them.

It’s time to push back and call their bluff.

2. Is it news for you that pain on the American people is already here and going to get worse? Why not take a stand now?

blink on October 16, 2013 at 4:56 PM

Refusing to raise the debt ceiling was leverage only if Obama really was afraid of hitting it. He had no reason to be, especially if it was going to cost him his entire legislative legacy.

You’re trying to make a false distinction. There is technically no difference between forcing Obama’s hand for new legislation and addressing existing legislation.

Maybe you need a civics lesson, but the process is the same. Passing an amendment to an existing law is the same as passing a new law – since an amendment is technically a new law.

blink on October 16, 2013 at 4:58 PM

I’m going to assume you misread my post and not that you’re stupid so I’ll reiterate the point you missed. Obama is powerless to pass new legislation or amend existing legislation right now because his party does not control the House. The GOP is powerless to pass new legislation or repeal or amend existing legislation because they don’t control the Senate and the White House (Obama is also powerless to repeal existing legislation but he’s not trying for that). Since the GOP is powerless to pass new legislation or amend existing legislation on their own they would need Obama to go along with their plan. Obama will not go along with their plan if the plan involves damaging his signature legislative accomplishment. Obama is insulated from the will of the people because he cannot seek re-election so it’s impossible to force his hand.

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 5:24 PM

The thing to do is to get working on that election.

limecat on October 16, 2013 at 5:11 PM

THIS!

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 5:26 PM

Bob Beckel joins Alan Colmes and Wolf Blitzer: ‘Delay Obamacare for one year.’

No. F*cking. Way.

Resist We Much on October 16, 2013 at 5:31 PM

Very good blog post Allahpundit..:)

Dire Straits on October 16, 2013 at 5:46 PM

Don’t delay it. You want this to be an issue from now going on.

Get involved locally and vote, vote, vote. Seriously. We have the ability to repeal this entire beast in two election cycles. Let’s make this happen!

Midwestprincesse on October 16, 2013 at 5:54 PM

“We have to win the Senate and win the White House.”

Great plan, all we need is a strong President and House majority willing to take away a Democrat entitlement and with the numerous rinos we’ll also need a 70 seat Senate majority to bust the Democrat filibuster.

This will all happen just before our dying sun expands and incinerates the earth. If effect, the Republicans are determined to wait an eternity for something that will never happen. I repeat, Great Plan!

RJL on October 16, 2013 at 6:10 PM

What are you talking about? If the House had refused to pass anything other than one bill to raise the debt ceiling than the debt ceiling would be hit unless Obama signed it.

Do you not understand this?

blink on October 16, 2013 at 4:09 PM

I’m talking about the fake default threat.
“He” that I referred to was Obama, and he could have signed the house bill.
IMO this was all a manufactured crisis to deflect attention from his failures.

Mimzey on October 16, 2013 at 6:36 PM

How many low-information voters out there incorrectly believe that it’s the shutdown, not Obama’s and HHS’s incompetence, that’s responsible for the health-care website disaster?

Well, they sure haven’t been helped by the RINO posts at Hot Air.

And Needham is just blowing smoke now. If the Republicans should win the Senate and Presidency along with the House in 2016, and the oligarchs that run both parties may not want that to happen, Needham knows it will be impossible to win a filibuster proof senate. The democrats will then filibuster any repeal and get away with it.

Once this process started on October 1st, the Republicans should have funded all of government except the PPACA, and let the President shut the government down. The House has the constitutional prerogative and right to determine what is funded. That’s it. Now the president will never negotiate.

The fact is the oligarchs of both parties like the PPACA because it or some modification of it provides more control over “We The People,” which both parties do not like and perhaps despise.

Falcon46 on October 16, 2013 at 6:47 PM

The strategic advantage only exists because we let it exist. I personally wouldn’t be held hostage forever by a co-owner that constantly threatened to burn our house down. At some point, I would tell them to do it – especially if I knew they were already ruining the house.

That would immediately level the playing field – even if they thought I would be shoulder a majority of the blame.

I guess I’m operating from an assumption that failing to raise the debt limit (by more than a few days or so) would result in very bad juju for Republicans in this case. No, there would be no default, but I’m working under the assumption there would be very real repercussions. I’m not certain that you can take $1 trillion of deficit spending out of the economy over the period of a year and not “let the house burn down” as you say.

My primary fear is what would come next. I’m thinking 1932 and a few generations of Democratic control of the House, etc. The American people are on hooked on entitlements like a heroin junkie. The cold-turkey approach envisioned by not furthering a debt cap seems appealing. After all, junkies need rehab. And I’m quite certain that, given time, it would work also.

However, unlike a effective rehab, the patient doesn’t yet want to get better and the patient can get up, walk out, and resume a normal profligate lifestyle anytime they want. My instinct tells me if we try and cure the budget deficit by burning it all down, then the patient will just walk out of the facility in 2014 and 2016 and go binging.

This will be an unpopular position, but I maintain that if conservatives have lost the war for this country, they did so when they abandoned arts, entertainment and the academy: the agents of political and cultural socialization.

limecat on October 16, 2013 at 7:02 PM

Then we should be either.

We aren’t insulated from the political fallout from that though. Obama is. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

Which means that he can’t raise the debt ceiling or get spending resolutions without House consent. That consent can be withheld.

This is true. The thing is given the options of hitting the debt ceiling and not passing spending resolutions vs. defunding Obamacare that Obama will choose the former. That’s why threatening to do the latter was a fool’s errand from the beginning.

Fine, then let the wrath rain down. Stop being more afraid of the wrath than Obama. It makes you weak and powerless.

You do realize that the only way to ever stop Obamacare is to win more elections than we have been, right? The House and Senate Republicans are still beholden to the will of the voters every Election Day. You’re not going to win the votes of people who are raining wrath down on you.

Fine, if Obama doesn’t care, then either do I. He’s ruining the country anyway, so a stand should be taken now. Let’s see what he decides to do.

blink on October 16, 2013 at 5:29 PM

Nope, you don’t realize it. Can’t say I’m surprised by that either. I would suggest you spend a little free time reviewing civics and arithmetic, because even a high school-level understanding of both would make it abundantly clear to you why what you’re feeling is so out of touch with reality.

And as an added bonus, not only will your civics study improve your understanding of how the government functions so you can learn important facts like how a bill becomes a law (Schoolhouse Rock will help as a quick substitute in the interim until the real studying begins in earnest), and not only will your arithmetic teach you to do things like count votes on the way to a bill becoming (or failing to become) a law, but all that studying you do will help get you ready for if you ever decide to go back and get that GED you’ve been thinking about! Just something to keep you occupied while you’re all busy not caring.

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 7:08 PM

but I maintain that if conservatives have lost the war for this country, they did so when they abandoned arts, entertainment and the academy: the agents of political and cultural socialization.

We are a confederated representative Federal Republic – not a democracy. Our government is based upon unalienable rights and the rule of law. It should not be being run by majority (mob) rule outside the legal strictures of the Constitution. Only by amendment can it be changed. Conservatives have lost nothing in a legal, constitutional sense. Its not about the arts, entertainment, and academia with its “Frankfort School” agenda. Its about a lawless political and financial class with a central bank funding whatever taxes won’t cover doing whatever they want knowing that there is no penalty for non-enforcement of Federal laws. So the laws are enforced against those they do not favor and not against those they like.

The real problem is the lack of an inclusive education for most people and the inability to look down the road to where we are heading. Maybe the internet and home schooling alternatives like Kahn Academy and Liberty Classroom can make a difference – hard to tell right now.

Falcon46 on October 16, 2013 at 7:22 PM

The D’s only have one-half of the law making part of government, which is Congress: they have the Senate.

The Executive can assent or veto a law, not make it, although this Bozo-in-Chief feels free to do as King James did and decide what he wants to enforce so that it is actually creating law where none exists… still the Executive executes the law.

ajacksonian on October 16, 2013 at 8:12 PM

Obama would have found the nearest TV camera and loudly blamed the Republicans while the stock market collapsed and his media sycophants carried his water. And on the off chance the people finally woke up and blamed Obama and his popularity tanked he wouldn’t care because Obamacare would still be the law of the land while the media machine kept pelting the LIVs with horror stories of human suffering because of those evil Republicans.

alchemist19 on October 16, 2013 at 4:20 PM

There are no LIVs. Get it right.

There are low-information representatives, and the GOPe is chock full of them.

Myron Falwell on October 16, 2013 at 8:13 PM

This is just another example of the stupid party. McConnell saying that it was his job to make sure Obama was a one term president was a stupid comment. First of all, it’s not his job, secondly, you just gave the Democrats a permanent talking point. Now comes the moron saying the Republicans can’t repeal Obamacare until 2017. Hey STUPID, that means Obama has 3 years to come close to making it work for enough voters that you lose. STFU!!!!

Let’s face it, the Democrats are professional politicians, they’re really terrible at governing, but they are professional politicians. I really don’t want the Republicans to become professional politicians, I just want them to think, it doesn’t take a lot of brain-power to know you don’t say stuff like this. THINK!!

If the Republicans shut up and allow Obamacare to work the way it should, it will be so dismal for the American people, they will vote for anyone who can straighten this mess out. The one good thing about this disaster that’s taken place is, people realize the Republicans really tried to get this delayed for a year. There are 2 possibilities, one is Obama could request a year delay, or he might just have faith and let it continue.

bflat879 on October 16, 2013 at 8:15 PM

Conservatives have lost nothing in a legal, constitutional sense.

Falcon46 on October 16, 2013 at 7:22 PM

And yet, here we are.

limecat on October 16, 2013 at 8:18 PM

I admired Ted Cruz’s filibuster. He was incredibly brave and actually read letter’s explaining the horrors of Obamacare.

But the shut down should have ended after a few days. It was never more than a symbolic gesture because we lost the chance to over turn Obamacare when we lost in 2012. We lost. They won, not fairly but they won.

I see the same people who did nothing but complain acting like they aren’t the architects of the 2012 defeat!!!! You are.

I can only conclude that you simply do not understand that this is a diverse country and you are a minority. And will remain a minority forever.

Your refusal to accept people different from yourselves only proves you do not really believe in the things you claim.

You just like to complain. You are afraid to win, because then your ideas would be tested and found wanting. Because nothing is perfect ever. And you don’t want to know that your ideas are not perfect.

You would rather complain and be perpetually unhappy.

petunia on October 16, 2013 at 8:43 PM

You mean when we have elected a conservative on a Third Party ticket?Because there will never again be a Republican President.Start sewing all those white flags to have at your GOP Convention-you shouldn’t be allowed the honor of displaying an American flag.Hear my words-there will be enough of us conservatives who are so fed up with you-we will bury you in millions of uncasted votes!You are finished,betraying us just one too many times.KMA Karl Rove,jump in another pool Krauty,come out of your ivory tower Will-the reality of reall pissed off conservatives is about to hit.

redware on October 16, 2013 at 9:29 PM

ITGuy is right – this farcical example of brinkmanship needed to be called…but because of the Vichy Republicans, it will not be.

…and despite the efforts of the Vichy Republicans, credit rating agencies will still downgrade the US because the debt / spending trajectory problems remain fundamentally unaddressed.

Athos on October 16, 2013 at 4:06 PM

Thank you.

And when the credit rating agencies downgrade the U.S. because of the out-of-control debt, Obama will blame Repulblicans. AGAIN.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIoALj0csAA

ITguy on October 16, 2013 at 9:55 PM

Someone needs to come up with the plan to tackle the massive media problem the Republicans have. I’m not sure how it can be done, but the media refuses to report the truth and is constantly cheerleading for the Democrats. It’s hard enough to defeat a political party that only cares about winning, with no regard for the country, let alone adding in a sycophant media that refuses to cover stories, allows Obama to lie, cheat and deceive the public, allows the Democrats to avoid the consequences of their actions, and helps them polarize the country. It’s a serious problem that needs to be dealt with.

Let Heritage do something helpful and solve the media problem. It can be done, if it has to be one outlet at a time. Look at how the Democrats have marginalized Fox News, it can be done. It takes some serious thought and a plan. Let Heritage do that, then I may think of doing some donating. Until then, they’re just another failure in a string of conservative efforts to become relevant.

bflat879 on October 16, 2013 at 10:57 PM

Someone needs to come up with the plan to tackle the massive media problem the Republicans have. I’m not sure how it can be done, but the media refuses to report the truth and is constantly cheerleading for the Democrats.

Easy. Get involved in media. I got my degree in journalism. You know how many other conservatives were out there? Basically none. The few that existed were, like me, doing sports writing. My experience working in newspapers and such indicates that most of these guys aren’t trying to be biased – they simply have never had to consider the world from a different perspective because both the academy and the media is essentially monolithic in ideology.

limecat on October 16, 2013 at 11:58 PM

So what would have happened if the House had held firm?

The arbitrary debt ceiling would have been hit. What would Obama have done? Please provide an answer.

blink on October 16, 2013 at 4:10 PM

He would have witheld SNAP benefits.

http://bit.ly/1gJjh11

Don’t believe me… see it for yourself at weazel zippers.

There’s no underhanded trick that Obama won’t stoop to.

Chaz706 on October 17, 2013 at 1:43 AM

Cruz stood up and said no. The Tea Party stood up and said no. You RINO pussies screamed and cried and wet yourself and started biting at their ankles because they showed perfectly how you are nothing more than appeasers and Obama whores.

northdallasthirty on October 16, 2013 at 1:58 PM

Game. Set. Match.

Kent18 on October 17, 2013 at 3:20 AM

Logic?

You forget who you are speaking with.

Adjoran on October 17, 2013 at 4:10 AM

Nice work. Whigs.

Bmore on October 17, 2013 at 7:42 AM

If winning the Senate, Congress and the White House was good enough, America would have been saved under George W. Bush.

David Blue on October 17, 2013 at 1:37 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3