The Republican voters aren't the problem. It's the folks who didn't bother to vote because of this nutty belief that "they're all the same, new boss same as old boss". Nader-voter types.

I guess they won't be bothered at all when they get half of their paycheck... after all, it's a slooowdown.

It's not a shutdown, or a slowdown.

It's a hiatus, or a vacation!

Or a lessening of goverment down to its leastest.

And it's also the fault of the Democratic "centrists" who continue to talk about meeting Republicans halfway, even as Republicans keep moving the goal posts.

What was it some Texas politician said about the middle of the road -- nothing there but a yellow line and dead armadillos?

who didn't listen? The choice in 2008 was between the energized Republicans and the sleepyheaded Democrats. The Republicans won because the Democrats didn't bother to put up a real fight. It is what happens when the party apparatus is focused exclusively on the presidency and the party regulars can no longer articulate a reason to vote for them.

And right on cue, guess what Jennifer Steinhauer of the liberal NY Times wove into her article: "and now threatens to lead to a partial shutdown of the federal government at the end of next week."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/30/us/politics/30riders.html?ref=politics

I get a little tired of hearing generalities about "drastic effects" that would result from a government shutdown. Things are different from the last time. A lot of payments are on automatic pilot and will still go out. So lets hear about the payments that won't go out. Some national parks and other facilities will be closed to the public. Lets hear the about impact from that. What federal activities will be curtailed and which ones won't be. The teabaggers are almost enthusiastic about a shutdown because they don't know what its impact will be. The general public is in the same boat. So lets hear from someone who can speak authoritatively about what specific impacts will occur.

I noticed the Hill referred to Ms. Bachmann as the "Tea Party leader." I understand she's chair of the caucus in the house, but the Tea Party definitely does not want a single leader and mentions of it usually drives them nuts... even if she represents all that is great, intelligent, thoughtful and benevolent about the Tea Party.

And it's also the fault of the Democratic

Oh yes, if there's a way to blame the democrats, it will be found, even without your help...

This is all a plan from the think tanks , way before the election, it just seemed to cascade in such a perfect storm for them, they now have taken to excesses which may temper their successes.

The union giant they have awakened may be too much for them to handle, but they still hold the upper hand for the moment , so all bets are off.

So if the Republicans are afraid of being blamed for a government shutdown, here's an idea: DON'T SHUT IT DOWN.

-And The Press will say "both sides are at fault" in the measured, dulcet tones of a dead Broder.

business leaders warned Wednesday.

Would these be the same "business leaders" that populate and fund the US Chamber of Commerce?

You created this f*cking monster with your millions of dollars of campaign funds. Get off your whiny asses and get it abck in its cage.

Steve,

They were warned. Look at what went down in FL. The voters knew he defrauded the govt. But because Obama is a black kenyan, and the dems are socialist, they voted for skelator anyway. The elected dems were to busy hiding from their shadows to clearly explain why the repubs were wrong and instead tried to become repub lite. They fucking deserve what they voted for. If the elected dems keep acting like pussies, they will keep on getting crushed.

"When voters were warned about the consequences of voting for Republican congressional candidates last fall, I really wish they'd listened."

It's teh stupid. There is no rational discussion that is going to make any difference. People believe what they want to and that's that. The only thing left is to do like Hurricane Carter and move to where people are still polite.

It's not a shutdown, it's the sound of a baby drowning in the bathtub.

When voters were warned about the consequences of voting for Republican congressional candidates last fall, I really wish they'd listened."

Yeah bloggers warned - the DNC, the Prez, Reid, not so much.

And now - more blurring of lines - that's what we need!

Can anyone quickly sum up what the White House is making the issue?

shut down is shut down.

plain and simple

Here's a better name than "republican shutdown," which is what everybody should be calling it constantly:

Republican Clusterfuck.

The Republicans want to destroy our country for their greed; love of KOCH BROS fascism/communism. Destruction of American DEMOCRACY is the Republican goal. Destruction of our US CONSTITUTION is the Republican goal. Republicans are doing everything they can to destroy our economy, our education,our infrastructure, our work force and our freedoms. Charge the republicans with TREASON for stealing our Democracy government.

I though the Republicans argued that "Uncertainty" (about tax rates) was harming the recovery, and the way to provide "Certainty" was to pass the tax cuts?

Isn't this the same thing..... remove the "Uncertainty" by passing an appropriations bill.

And as a Federal worker, I have a particularly grumpy attitude about this. I face weeks without a paycheck, and I can bet after this all ends I will NOT get my back pay for lost wages (as we did last time) because "Those Lazy Stupid Gummint Workers should have to sacrifice for the good of the U.S. of A."

"Calling it New Coke didn't make it taste better..."

And there's your Democratic Party - always on top of the latest trends.

[take care of, thanks - mod.]

The GOP is going to shut down the government because they believe that the ensuing financial chaos will benefit them in their ultimate goal: the annihilation of the Democratic party. They are going to go there. This is going to happen, as any of us who grew up in right-wing Republican families and communities can attest. And just wait until the debt-ceiling debate comes to the fore.

My hunch is that the public will make them pay politically, but frankly, I don't know how it will play out. I do know that if the president and Congressional Dems continue to carve away at the social safety net after extending the Bush tax cuts -- if they continue to shift ever rightward to meet the demands of crazy, feral hostage takers -- I will under no circumstances vote for them in '12. I do not wish to belong to a party so terrified of a fight and so contemptuous of its base.

It's easy to blame the voters who stayed at home last fall, but personally I blame the Democratic politicians who do not lead, do not fight and do not inspire.

Many Lefties are absolutely disgusted with Obama and our "representatives" in Congress. I have heard from many friends and a few online personalities that although Obama and the D's have done of good (especially in light of the opposition) they seem to give up, or adopt Republican talking points, on the most important issues all too easily.

Afghanistan, The Bush Tax Cuts, Bradley Manning and so many other issues have made a lot of us see the Dems as nothing more than Repugs with a different PR spin. I can totally understand anyone who doesn't see the point in voting these days.

What we need to focus on is NOT attacking those who are giving up on our Party. Instead we need to focus on making those whom we elect do what we put them in there to do. One can hardly expect Progressives to support Obama or any congressional Dems when they tend to act like Republican-lites.

I am terrified that next year a well-intentioned Green Party candidate or something similar may gain enough steam to pull a Nader on us and hand the government completely over to the Repugs again. As long as elected D's act like R-juniors this is a risk.

Voting (D) just to vote (D) makes little sense if our elected officials keep helping the country slide further and further to the right.

For my part, I swallow my bile and vote (D), though I do live in one of the most Democtratic parts of the country so I don't feel like my vote makes a difference anyway. But I can totally sympathize with the millions of other voters who don't see a point in voting for the other side by voting Dem.

Most of the "partial" shutdown, I think, will involve discretionary domestic spending, which is what Republicans want to eliminate anyway. So for them, shutdown is just budgeting by a different name.

(And thank you, Mods, for quickly removing Trollop's idiotic and felonious comment.)

I can totally understand anyone who doesn't see the point in voting these days.

Really? Because not only do I not understand, I am mystified how at this particularly moment anyone could still feel this way.

You cite friends who acknowldge that the elected Dems have done a lot of good, and then balance that with other areas where they have not done well. Have we gotten so spoiled (and when and how?) that we now expect perfection -- otherwise its just as well to let the Republicans in?

Do we really get to blame Democrats for failing to inspire us to show up on election day and then argue that the problem with Republicans is that their governing is not "of the people"? Sin't showing up our civic duty no matter what?

But most of all, I do not understand how any non-Tea Partier can look at Wisconsin, can look at Florida, can listen to Cantor, Peter King, Steve King, Michelle Bachmann, Sarah Palin and Boehner, can hear the Republican policies on the economy, on reproductive choice, on religious pluralism and so many other things and honestly take the Naderite position that it is all the same corporatocracy, that the difference between the parties is not sufficiently motivating, that it really just doesn't matter.

That is intellectually and politically lazy. Ask union households in Wisconsin if there is any difference. Ask long-term gay couples in Iowa if there is any difference. Ask a young woman, pregnant by her abusive ex-boyfriend, if it makes any difference. Ask the laid-off parents of a child with pre-existing health conditions if it makes a difference.

The right shows up no matter what. They vote for their team no matter what. And that is why they are kicking our sorry asses up and down the field.

In 2010, Republican turnout was roughly the same as 2008. The change in the composition of the electorate was complacent Dems who turned out in much smaller numbers. We bitch, but we're getting the government we let happen -- and we have no one to blame but our own lazy, petulant, purer-than-thou selves.

(the pregnancy example above should refer to South Dakota. and my apologies for all of the typos - i was on a rant.)

Forget the SHUTDOWN/SLOWDOWN meme and concentrate on the 'We wouldn't have done it, but those awful DEMOCRATS made us!' which is starting to percolate. Oh and MITCH, etal? I'm getting mighty sick of the 'yeah those Republicans are slime but it's really the DEMOCRATS that don't stand up to them...' theme. There are PLENTY of Dems standing up but if you don't watch MSNBC (and even that can be suspect at times) you NEVER see them. For every Dem there are 5 Republicans and then the commentators cut them off like they're the preacher's kids. The Dems BIGGEST problem is the whining that comes from THEIR side...we gotta deal with the GOP and THEN with our own? You gotta legitimate complaint? Voice it...but the amorphous whining it getting tiresome.

A slowdown is something workers do -- this is a lockout.

And from what I can tell, the average American isn't going to notice a thing because the services they most often see (SS checks, VA benefits, etc.) are likely to be exempt this time around.

@zeitgeist

Please keep in mind this is NOT my feeling on the matter, I vote and I vote (D) because it is the best chance that we have. But that does not mean that I am going to demonize our fellow progressives who are giving up on our political party.

Maybe I'm too willing to see things through other peoples eyes. The gist of what I hear from my friends and various other political junkies is this:

Sure, Obama and the D's have done some good in office; but most of that was fluff. The best thing that they've done is probably HCR - and that was a massive capitulation to the right wing and the insurance industry. And they STILL cannot fight the Republican spin-machine on that one. Even with AARP and much of the medical community on our side is still losing that battle.

On the things that matter most, the things that Obama campaigned about (Guantanamo or ending the Bush Tax Cuts for example) we cave. We cave and we hardly put up a fight. When is the last time you saw a (D) fight back with even half of the force of an (R)? Even one tenth of it?

That's how a lot of people feel. I'm just stating fact, not taking sides.

I'm going to vote, you are going to vote; but telling those who did not vote that they are spoled, lazy and petulant will certainly NOT get them to start voting. You want their votes? At least try to understand their thought process.

I have always enjoyed your comments zeitgeist; you're insightful and pretty damned smart. But I do not feel that attacking progressives who did not vote is going to help anything at all. All I'm trying to do is show you their PoV.

@SYSPROG

Thanks for tearing into me, I almost feel like I'm at a Repug Blog where if I don't agree 100% with other commentators I am automatically The Devil.

My only major complaints about the current administration and the D's in congress are Bradley Manning and the Bush Tax Cuts. Manning's treatment is inhumane, and extending the Bush Tax Cuts until 2012 is stupid on multiple levels.

If those are not legitimate enough for you, then I am afraid nothing will be. But even those issues did not stop me from voting (D) last fall. There are plenty of Dems who stand up to the Repugs, just not the Dems who matter most on some of the most important battles.

Let me reiterate my point again:

Demonizing progressives who did not vote last fall is not going to help anything. We have to win them back, and that requires understanding their PoV and figuring out what we can do to make them vote next time.

I voted, and will keep voting. So stop acting like I am a non-voter who only brings "amorphous whining" to the table. I am telling you what I have been told by many of my friends here in the Bay Area, as well as a few people online. I explained this in my original comment.

I'm sorry that this has apparently made at least two of you upset with me. That is not my intention.

I agree (as your're surely sick of seeing) that the elected Dems lack fight, that they may be the worst messagers and negotiators in the whole of history, and that they are far too quick to compromise both on issues and, worse, on principles.

It is fair to take them to task for that, to seek to primary them where it makes sense, etc. But the real answer is not throwing ones hands up in frustration -- it is in working harder to remake the party from the local precinct committee on up.

I understand you were giving voice to others, not stating your own view, and I apologize if that came off as an attack on you personally. But I do disagree with you that we shouldn't call out the non-voting Dems. I'm not sure what the alternative is; if they cannot see (a) what Nader votes did in 2000, regardless of how poor a campaign Gore ran and (b) what the 2010 Republican class is doing to this country, I'm not sure any gentle explanation or encouragement will change anything.

I've tried the nice way over the years; voters seem to just ratchet up the degree to which they want to be coddled, the rationalizations they use to stay on the couch because the process is so broken and the candidates all the same.

Nonsense. Times call for a little tougher love to wake them out of their trances and make them understand this is on them.

Yes, I am reaching an age where soon I'll be telling them to keep their damn frisbee off of my lawn. :)

I appreciate the care with which you argue your points, zeitgeist, but I gotta say that the base has been treated abysmally by the Dem leadership, and at some point we have to draw the line. For me it's the administration's stampede to the right on fiscal matters, which would likely only plunge the country back into recession should those policies be adopted. I mean, if the Democrats assist in killing off the middle and working classes, who on earth is going to vote for them? Under a Democratic president and a partially held Democratic Congress, the GOP is savaging the social safety net far beyond Karl Rove's wildest dreams. And I don't want to belong to a party that won't fight for a few core principles.

Obama would do much better by standing his ground, even if it means a shutdown -- it would fire up the base, something he MUST do if he wants to be re-elected.

zeitgeist, I'm only 30 and I already to tell them to stay off of my damned lawn.

I agree about the tough love and I certainly understand that getting what you want is obviously not going to happen most of the time for most of the people.

As I told a friend the other day, "Happiness is not a right; the pursuit of happiness is."

It's a fine line that a lot of people fail to grasp (especially Progressives with our innate idealism) and that is a big part of the ennui that hurt us last year.

I think we need to make the non-voters see that, even if they have valid points, it is sometimes better to support the devil you know than to allow the one you don't to rise to ascendance. But to do that we can't just ignore their complaints or risk alienating them because the lack of turnout last fall was tragic.

So, yeah, thanks for the friendly response. You are awesome zeitgeist, and often inspire me to think. So does Steve, which is why I've stuck with him since the good old carpetbagger days. Even though we all may disagree sometimes, we are on the same side. That's what makes this country rock.

Keep on rocking.

I want to get this in before the Mods shut down the Comments for the night, so I'll be brief:

zeitgeist is RIGHT. The Right wins because they ALWAYS *VOTE*, no matter what. As a matter of fact, if the enviroment is "discouraging" to them, they'll make even more of an effort to vote.

Voting is not, and never has been, anything you do just because you're encouraged or "fired up", it's something you do because it is your CIVIC DUTY to advise on the direction of the Government. Especially if you DON'T like what's going on.

I understand that many Progressives, and I am amongst you, are deeply disappointed with some of Obama's actions, the horrendous treatment of Bradley Manning amongst the worst of it. But, ask yourselves this: How did regular Americans get so *twisted* as to think that this is normal, let alone *acceptable*? Answer: There's been a forty, close to fifty-year push by radical right-wingers to warp American thinking using bigotry, paranoia, racism, and religious fundametalism, among other things, to push American society into accepting Authoritarism. And, the people most likely to support that have ALWAYS voted. And, establishment Democrats have seen that that is a very dependable source of votes - not people who support liberal, progressive ideas, who *sometimes* vote. So, what is to be done?

We VOTE.

We VOTE in EVERY election, no matter how "minor".

We TALK to our families, friends, neighbors, and co-workers (off the job, of course) about our ideas and how important they are to them.

We PUSH BACK against right-wing ideas on the TV, in the newspapers, whereever we find them.

And, we BOYCOTT the products of right-wing idealogues who are poisoning our country, like the Kochs'. Best way to deal with mosquitos is *usually* to "drain the swamp."

But, ALWAYS, *VOTE*.

yeah, what is this deal with the shut down of certain threads after certain times? did i miss something? it interferes with us night owls' posting habits!

I figured it was to keep the trolls away.

Steve, I've been reading you for many years, way back to early carpetbagger. I read you every day. I await your next post. Why? Because I like your take on things. You inform me. Sometimes you amuse me. But most importantly, you make me think. For example, this post. I'm very familiar with the 'budget - close down gov't' impasse, but I hadn't thought about the larger economic consequences of a shutdown. Now I am.

I'm clearly a fan, Steve.

But...

I'm getting tired of your end of post snipes at the stupid voters who elected these dolts.

For me, this is beginning to detract.

whome

I want to support zeitgeist's rant and say that I think Mitch's friends are dead wrong about Obama and the Democrats passing "only fluff" in the last Congress. The Democrats whiffed on some things, but they passed an astonishing amount of good legislation with absolutely no GOP support. What got watered down had to be in order to pass the 60 vote filibuster in the Senate. The last Congress was historic and that's not enough?

We can piss and moan about Blue Dogs all we want, but it took Blue Dog votes to get any legislation through the last Congress, because no GOP members would break ranks. And like it or not, the only Democrats that are going to get elected from conservative districts will be conservative Democrats. Without them, we got nothing in the face of a disciplined GOP.

Our host often complains about the GOP's lack of seriousness when it comes to governing. We have a lack of seriousness on the left, too. Except it's not in the halls of Congress or in the White House.