Posted on 09/17/2013 11:11:04 AM PDT by Jim Robinson
National Journal: “By going after one GOP ‘faction’ and appealing to the other, Obama is seeking leverage in a tactical dispute that has vexed Republicans all summer. … In seeking to further divide the camps, Obama is hoping to avert a government shutdown while also achieving some Democratic policy aims, such as rollbacks of the sequester-induced spending cuts that Obama on Monday said were hurting economic growth.”
The conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board has some tough words for Republicans who want to bring the government to the brink of a shutdown over Obamacare funding. "Some Republicans think they are sure to hold the House in 2014 no matter what happens because of gerrymandering, but even those levees won't hold if there's a wave of revulsion against the GOP. Marginal seats still matter for controlling Congress. The kamikazes could end up ensuring the return of all-Democratic rule."
(Excerpt) Read more at firstread.nbcnews.com ...
If the Republicans manage the message, they can win this. The polls are on their side. People are very skeptical about Obamacare, its costs, and who their providers will be. On top of that they see all the unilateral exemptions and delays that bypassed congress. There is wide recognition that his optimistic promises were lies.
If Republicans can make the right case, stand up against Obamacare, and shut the thing down, they will be seen as winners.
It is often said “you have to pick your battles”. This is the one.
I would add "specifically mentioned" so no weasely lawyer play on words slip in there...
"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers"
- Dick the Butcher; "Henry VI" Part II, act IV, Scene II
I think Dick went a little too far. I'd settle for getting rid of the weasels who pretend that words don't mean what they say.
Still blaming sequestration that was his idea. Of course, the media won’t ever call him on it.
All that needs to be said by the conservative ‘faction’ in the House is that the funds are available to keep everything in government going except Obamacare. They can’t lose.
Republicans didn’t get blamed in 1996. The poll question was “Who is responsible for shutting down the government?” It didn’t ask who was to BLAME. Republicans should fund all kinds of polls asking “If the obama shuts down the government then folds, who will you credit with stopping obamacare?”
As for blaming obama, that won’t happen. Reid will never get the CR to get to obama’s desk. But I do believe the democrats will get so much fire they’ll cave in about a week.
-PJ
Stop shipping the (government) cheese, and they'll wake up in no time.
Better to be blamed of a gov’t shut down, then to be blamed for insuring the implementation of obamacare.
No matter what republicans do it is a lose, lose as far as liberals and their media goes, nothing left to do but the right thing. Shut it down, shut it all down.
There’s a piece mission on the GOP side—a really dynamic leader with a following. If the GOP passed a budget that left Obamacare out, and just sat around, Obama would probably win the media argument about how the evil GOP just wants to act the sore loser and throw a monkey wrench in the government.
On the other hand, if the GOP had a dynamic voice — maybe Cruz could become that in time, but I don’t think he has the following now — it could be made clear that the only thing keeping the government from operating (sans Obamacare) is 3 or 4 votes in the Senate and a Presidential veto.
My take.
I meant “piece missing”, not “piece mission”. Sorry about the bad proofing.
Jim I need to lose another 50lbs before the “pitchfork” thing.
It won’t be his fault, at least not according to the big outlets. They will blame the ‘Pubbies, including most of the folks getting those checks.
I’m a little surprised that some of my FRiends think that the very same low-information voters who RE-ELECTED Obama will NOW decide that any future government shut-down is Obama’s fault. Hmmm....? Wishful thinking...?
And I’m surprised that some of my FRiends seem to think that Obama’s ONLY way to end the shut-down is to “agree” to de-fund Obamacare.
I think it’s as least as likely that Obama would win that “fight” and then go on to elect a Democrat majority in the House and a filibuster-proof Senate.
But there are other ways Obama can win.
Suppose that Obama lets the shut-down run for a week or so — to allow the media to line up all the low-information voters behind him so he has a “majority” again — and then he DISSOLVES the House of Representatives.
After that, Obama would rule with “the consent of the Senate”. Obama’s justification for this power-grab might be that “The “old” House was so beholden to the richest 1%, that a NEW election is needed to make the House more representative and much, much more diverse.”
Oh, what’s that? You say that DISSOLVING the House would not be LEGAL under our Constitution? Really? What Attorney General have you consulted recently? A government shut-down IS a time of “crisis”, donchaknow, and this White House NEVER lets a “crisis” go to waste...
Or suppose Obama, using his “emergency powers” djuring the “crisis”, EXCHANGES new government bonds for 50% of the funds in each American’s 401k, IRA, private pension fund, etc.
Then those funds seized by Obama could be used to “re-open” the government without asking the House or Senate for approval. “Can’t happen!” you say. But something like this DID happen in Argentina. ALL that’s required is a dishonest President and...
And do you think Fidelity, or ING, or any other pension fund trustee would resist a PRESIDENTIAL ORDER to “exchange” those assets? Do you think their CEOs are ready to do jail-time for trying to protect other peoples’ money? Our money?
And just how effective are the security guards of those private financial institutions, anyway, compared to the well-armored SWAT teams of the IRS, NSA, TSA, EPA etc.?
I really doubt that my Gadsen Flag tee-shirt (and pitchfork) will stop even one hollow-point bullet — let alone the 1.5 BILLION bullets mysteriously purchased by “our” government.
That’s why I say, “Let’s not get into a “fight” at a time and place of Obama’s choosing.”
And why I say, “Since Obama and his minions really, REALLY want to get us Republicans in a pre-election “fight” about shutting down government, we can hurt the Democrats the most by NOT doing what they want us to do.”
Better idea. We FIGHT the bastards at every turn! Never give in, never give up, never surrender!!
Hi Jim,
I love those Churchillian slogans, but...
...I think preventing a Democrat takeover of ALL of our government is too important an issue to be decided by “who” has the best slogan.
We need VOTES in 2014 to stop Obama!
Obama thinks he can stop all the embarrassing Congressional investigations of his administration if Nancy Pelosi takes control of the House from John Boehner. And he’s right, you know.
Obama’s strategy to GET THE VOTES he needs in 2014 is to put the “evil” Tea Party on the defensive and thereby DISTRACT the majority of Americans from being angry about:
Obamacare — Repeal is favored now
The Economy — Five years of incompetence finally being noticed by the media
Foreign affairs — Even Maureen Dowd is embarrassed!
Domestic spying — Finally, an issue the kids understand!
So.....
How does your “tactic” of flamboyantly taking the blame for causing a government shut-down serve the “strategy” of generating VOTES for Republicans in 2014?
[Cue sound of crickets chirping]
Spoken like a tru blue rino.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.