On the government shutdown front, shit just for interesting: We may see GOP moderates vote with the - Polidicks

[QUOTE='[sluggo];42362622']The democrats will swing further left, while controlling the complete majority of congress for the next 20 years.[/QUOTE] I don't see the Democrats making a fast and hard swing left as soon as they get more control. It's not as if the only reason there are moderate Democrats is because there are extremist Republicans.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;42362648]lmao yes the democrats are actually just waiting in the wings for conservatism in America to die so they can institute their socialist regime. not that it would happen anyway but even if Democrats somehow acquired a political monopoly their positions on social policy would shift to the left but their domestic and foreign policy would remain about the same. Democrats are a party of establishment status quo and being moderate and not this far-left marxist caricature that some would have you believe.[/QUOTE] Not far left Marxist, not even hard line socialist, but raising taxes, increasing welfare, and socializing industry = socialism. It what democrats want. However moral that may seem, it would screw up the economy beyond repair. It's whats happening in large portions of Europe now, rampant spending and taxing with no real opposition to hold people accountable. Fiscal responsibility is a requirement for the nation to work.

[QUOTE='[sluggo];42362688']Not far left Marxist, not even hard line socialist, but raising taxes, increasing welfare, and socializing industry = socialism. It what democrats want. However moral that may seem, it would screw up the economy beyond repair. It's whats happening in large portions of Europe now, rampant spending and taxing with no real opposition to hold people accountable. Fiscal responsibility is a requirement for the nation to work.[/QUOTE] Spending is fine as long as you are making the right spending choices. Spending stimulates economic growth.

[QUOTE='[sluggo];42362688']Not far left Marxist, not even hard line socialist, but raising taxes, increasing welfare, and socializing industry = socialism. It what democrats want. However moral that may seem, it would screw up the economy beyond repair. It's whats happening in large portions of Europe now, rampant spending and taxing with no real opposition to hold people accountable. Fiscal responsibility is a requirement for the nation to work.[/QUOTE] I don't understand how you can lecture me on fiscal responsibility then turn around and say that raising taxes is socialism with the implication that it's a bad thing to do.

[QUOTE='[sluggo];42362688']Not far left Marxist, not even hard line socialist, but raising taxes, increasing welfare, and socializing industry = socialism. It what democrats want. However moral that may seem, it would screw up the economy beyond repair. It's whats happening in large portions of Europe now, rampant spending and taxing with no real opposition to hold people accountable. Fiscal responsibility is a requirement for the nation to work.[/QUOTE] Considering the difference between the political standard definition of "fiscal responsibility" in the US and the dictionary definition of the words and how they apply to national economies, America would probably do better with some socialism on the short run without worrying quite so much about the "fiscal responsibility", and when some sanity is restored, bring in some people who [I]actually[/I] are prepared to use the words in their proper meaning and implement policies that actually hew to the concept to keep the social policy machine from producing too much lard on the side. Basically, the US needs to come back to the middle before it's going to be able to sanely budget a socialist safety net.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;42362662]The Democrats have near complete power already if it weren't for the radicals in the GOP in the House. I'm no fan of the Democrats, but I hardly see them having a large control of the government for a short time as a seriously bad thing. It's been shown in quite a few articles throughout the year that the Democrats have a better chance against a Tea Party candidate than a moderate Republican in many places. So instead of Democrats vs Tea Party, it'll be Democrats vs. GOP vs. Tea Party in which I'm sure the GOP will do much better in.[/QUOTE] Your still splitting the conservative vote. You'll have liberals, conservatives, and REALLY conservatives. The really conservatives who begrudgingly vote republican would be able to vote their own candidates, taking away support for moderate candidates. About democrats being in control as a bad thing, socially it is fine. Legalize drugs and prostitution and whatever, but economically, no. Look at Obama. He didn't exactly do that well with a democrat complete majority. Debt went up faster than in history, and economy stagnated (actually got worse). Bush was pretty fiscally liberal too, and look how he did. Going further left will have us wind up more and more like western Europe. Teetering on the edge of socialism (but to scared to take the plunge), unable to fund ourselves, and in economic collapse.

[QUOTE='[sluggo];42362768']Your still splitting the conservative vote. You'll have liberals, conservatives, and REALLY conservatives. The really conservatives who begrudgingly vote republican would be able to vote their own candidates, taking away support for moderate candidates. About democrats being in control as a bad thing, socially it is fine. Legalize drugs and prostitution and whatever, but economically, no. Look at Obama. He didn't exactly do that well with a democrat complete majority. Debt went up faster than in history, and economy stagnated (actually got worse). Bush was pretty fiscally liberal too, and look how he did. Going further left will have us wind up more and more like western Europe. Teetering on the edge of socialism (but to scared to take the plunge), unable to fund ourselves, and in economic collapse.[/QUOTE] Obama is fairly fiscally conservative. He's no where near the socialist dream/monster that Democrats/Republicans wish/fear.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;42362722]I don't understand how you can lecture me on fiscal responsibility then turn around and say that raising taxes is socialism with the implication that it's a bad thing to do.[/QUOTE] It's a fine balance between Fiscal Responsibility and Economy. Raising taxes is not good for an already faltering economy. If we do anything, we decrease rates and take out corporate breaks (try to keep corporate profits here). The people being taxes to death aren't the rich, aren't the poor, but those who have money to tax, and can't afford lawyers to protect it. You shouldn't need a lawyer to understand the tax code.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;42362545]Because people group together as some agree on common issues.[/QUOTE] I agree that people who share common views on issues grouping together is fine. what i don't think is fine is people going, "well i'm a democrat, and they think x, so it must be true!", instead of actually looking at the issue itself and making their own decision about it. sorry for not being clear.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;42362801]Obama is fairly fiscally conservative. He's no where near the socialist dream/monster that Democrats/Republicans wish/fear.[/QUOTE] His rates of spending doesn't show that. He is more fiscally careless than anything else.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;42362557]The way I see it, once the Tea Party secedes from the GOP, it'll go back to the Dems vs GOP because the Tea Party on their own will never gain much traction.[/QUOTE] doubt the tea party would ever seriously split from the GOP as they already know this. all talk no walk.

[QUOTE=GunFox;42362565]Is your government currently at risk of literally ceasing to function? As in all federal services stop and you basically are only a country in name? No? Then it sounds like a step up. You think siding with Bush was bad? WE MADE HIM.[/QUOTE] heads up the american system is literally designed to be this inefficient and slow to change. deal with it. more parties in the us would only mean dumb issue advocacy and would only serve to encourage logrolling. which is bad. corrupt. and stupid as shit. [editline]30th September 2013[/editline] also we see here a post by gunfox, with a fundamental misunderstanding of what a government "shutdown" entails (protip: go look at the gov' shutdown under clinton for better information)

[QUOTE=GunFox;42362565]Is your government currently at risk of literally ceasing to function? As in all federal services stop and you basically are only a country in name? No? Then it sounds like a step up. You think siding with Bush was bad? WE MADE HIM.[/QUOTE] hi i'm gunfox who thinks a government shutdown entails literally ceasing to become a state

[QUOTE=Bentham;42362523]Revolt failed, the same unclean legislation is going back to the Senate, where it will be almost guaranteed dead on arrival.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/09/30/rebellion_by_house_gop_moderates_fails_completely_and_utterly.html"]Yup, toast.[/URL]

Senate rejected it, what a shock.

[QUOTE=Bentham;42363077]Senate rejected it, what a shock.[/QUOTE] If the government shuts down every political office holder should be fired and replaced with new ones.

My parents are Republicans but they've been voting Democrat for quite a while now.

I expect either shut down, or Republicians facing replacement in 2014 with Tea party Candidates.

[QUOTE=ZachPL;42363152]If the government shuts down every political office holder should be fired and replaced with new ones.[/QUOTE] I think we should be able to furlough their salaries

This is offtopic but does the NSA get shutdown during government shutdown? [QUOTE=Bentham;42363187]I think we should be able to furlough their salaries[/QUOTE] Too bad the House passed a bill saying that they would be paid if the government shutdown

[QUOTE=Banhfunbags;42363193]This is offtopic but does the NSA get shutdown during government shutdown?[/QUOTE] I don't know for sure, but I would doubt it would be anywhere close to a shut down. Most likely just non-essential staff furloughed, similar to the DoD

[QUOTE=Banhfunbags;42363193]This is offtopic but does the NSA get shutdown during government shutdown?[/QUOTE] Fucking lol, as if anyone's even authorized to ask that question. (Yes, I know Congress is precisely who is, that's the joke.) [QUOTE=Banhfunbags;42363193]Too bad the House passed a bill saying that they would be paid if the government shutdown[/QUOTE] [I]How convenient...[/I]

I'm watching a livestream here [url]http://www.politico.com/livestream2/[/url]

From what it looks like, the House will push through one more time with something that also still has Obamacare related nonsense. In other words, the deadline will pass without success.

Nothing like watching the [URL="rationalwiki.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_institutions"]Iron Law of Institutions[/URL] prove itself yet again.

I went on /pol/ to see what they were saying to about it, nothing but "IT'S HAPPENING" and ron paul spam everywhere

[QUOTE=AJisAwesome15;42363308]I went on /pol/ to see what they were saying to about it, nothing but "IT'S HAPPENING" and ron paul spam everywhere[/QUOTE] Or, as they call it on /pol/, "Monday".

Where's Reagan when you need him

[QUOTE=Sally;42363330]Where's Reagan when you need him[/QUOTE] dead. thank god.

From what I've been hearing, Boehner may actually have the votes in the House GOP to keep his seat if a clean CR passes. The number of truly crazy people that just want to shut down the government is down to around 30, but the question is: how afraid of these people is Boehner at this point?