Yes.

or will initiate their decline as a national party. This congress will force the issue of whether a third party is necessary or possible.

What we are seeing is unmanly Unseemly, and pathetic.

I don’t like always being the guy complaining about the cloud in the silver lining…but I don’t for the life of me see what we’ve gained by the stampede to pass everything in the lame duck session followed by the craven and cowardly capitulation on the 2010 budget….and what’s bad is this….and I don’t see a lot of talk about this…but we are still fighting over the 2010 budget when we should be voting and marking up the 2011 budget…so the pressure and scare tactics Obama and Reid are currently employing won’t go away if we keep kicking this can down the road because the Dems will then begin playing chicken with us on the 2011 budget as they have on this.

I would also say this on your poker analogy….if you’re bluffing…you NEVER tell the other guy you’re bluffing….our guys are laying their cards on the table ahead of time and still trying to buy the pot after letting the other guy know he has them beat.

Hey, only 95% of Americans want to cut the budget, why be on that side….

Make the cuts, stand by them, make the continual case for them (and for, say, electing Republicans). I don’t mind the slow bleed strategy (hey you can’t object to 6 billion in cuts this week when you just agreed to 6 billion in cuts 2 weeks ago), but by gosh, have some stones to defund things Americans want defunded – PP, NPR to start.

As an OR guy, I’ve had lots of classroom hours about functional optimization. This involves finding a solution to a problem that gets you as much of what you and your buddies want as is physically possible.

2009 was the FY in which the Dem party optimized. They finally passed the budget that left no liberal interest group or abortuary behind. Thus it is neither a coincidence nor a failure from the POV of a left liberal that no Democratically controlled legislature has even deigned to pass a budget after FY09. They would never get as much candy from the process again.

if they let the media and the Dems set the rules. The time will never be right, barring a Republican president and a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and how likely is all that before Obamacare is fully implemented? Thus, they have to force the issue, and have the intelligence and confidence to wage an effective PR battle, not just surrender because PR is hard and the press is a bunch of meanies. Reagan did it, the Swift Boat Veterans did it, the Contract with America did it, the disorganized Tea Party did it, so it is definitely possible to win the PR. They have to start denouncing Democrats for their actions, expressing outrage at the Democrats for creating this continuing resolution mess, denouncing Nancy for sneaking Obamacare into this year’s budget, They have to express outrage that Nancy, of all people, would talk about morality in the budget process. They have to denounce Obama for going golfing while the world is in flames. They have to challenge reporters and refute reporters and question their objectivity when they act as Democratic party hacks. This all takes confidence in their own position, and a firm desire to prevail, not just to get by. And no more hiding behind “rules” no one ever heard of before as an excuse to keep funding Obmacare.

Our army is a lot more conservative after the last election, but there are still a number of old guard and a number of whom put politics above principle. For this battle, we cannot change them and primary threats may not be enough to keep them in line. We cannot put it off until the next election. We need to win this battle now, but we have to win it with the army we have, not the army we wish we had. With these current troops, the odds of winning a full government shutdown are long. So, let me ride my horse one more time. A planned partial shutdown strategy will work much better then a full shutdown. If we keep the popular programs running (like social security, defense, etc.) then the old guard and the squishes will feel much more confident and less likely to desert their posts.

I feel worse today than I did after HCR. So many people at Red State have been so great to watch and informative. It has really energized me, but I have to admit I am running very low on enthusiasm right now. I feel betrayed.

We are supposed to attend the country GOP fundraiser Frday. First night out for hubby and me (small kids) in months. I am not looking forward to this event at all, and am tempted to skip it as we have already paid and I really am not obligated to attend. I can get lied to by just about anyone so not sure I want to go listen to the garbage from this party.

I can’t be the only actiivist that is fed up the GOP is not strong enough to be successful without us, but then maybe the power players don’t care about being successful.

it is from being shot in the back.

Is it, Leon? Didn’t we say the same thing about the last CR? Won’t we say the same about the next?

The House Republicans strategy on HR 1 confounds me. It makes no sense to me at all. Why spend a week passing a long-term spending measure with riders defunding Planned Parenthood, elements of ObamaCare and the EPA’s power to implement a Global Warming regime when they are not willing to force the Senate to give that measure a full and free debate?
Seems like House Republicans made a mistake when they passed the first short-term CR, because they took off all the pressure in the Senate to pass HR 1. They may have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory with that move. I am trying to understand this strategy being employed by the House and I just don’t get it.
I am still trying to understand how these last two short term spending measures (CRs) increase the probability that the long-term spending measure, H.R. 1, passing the Senate. It seems more likely that with every short-term CR, the House Republicans are losing leverage to get H.R. 1 into a conference with the Senate.
Excellent post by Leon.

If you can’t tell the difference between Boehnor and Pelosi, you are not a serious conservative. Disagree with tactics all you want, but save the hyperbole for when it makes sense.

I have mixed feelings about this whole mess. Once again I have contacted my squishy republican rep to express my strong disapproval of his unwillingness to take a stand. Had I my preference we’d have unfunded Obama care in the first CR. So if this is a strategy it is one that I hate.

I recognize that I am both far better politically informed and have far more developed political views than the typical swing voter who decides most elections. If you look at the polls and watch their trends, the republicans are gaining ground and Obama and the congressional democrats are losing ground. This is especially true for “independents”. The ones whose support will be needed on spending and in the next election.

What matters is the final outcome. When there is a final vote on funding the remainder of this year and a budget is passed for next year, what will our spending look like?

When the electorate has to decide the future of the country in Nov. 2012, what will they decide?

I hate the way the current skirmishes are playing out. I hate that we don’t see more republicans taking and explaining strong conservative stands. But I would hate far more for the answers to those earlier questions to come out the wrong way.

I hope they are setting the stage to successfully engage in the coming spending debate. If not and we don’t get the outcome on spending and the budget that we need, we primary them. Then we work to win in 2012.

In this case outcomes matter more than process.

The time is now to stand and fight. No more compromises or fear of a government “shutdown.” It is time to dig in and stand on principle.

And you know, I didn’t have a problem with the concept of a CR to avoid an *immediate* shutdown battle while we prepared the battlespace. But the longer we go without that fight, the worse the stakes; if anything, it may be that the optics would have been better to have that fight while the Democrats were shutting down legislatures in Wisconsin and Indiana.

If I could wave a wand, I would do pretty much all of what many conservatives would like: defund Obamacare, defund Planned Parenthood, etc. I agree that we are nearing bankruptcy, and that decisive action is needed. The problem is that I can’t wave a wand, and neither can the House.

We have to acknowledge that we don’t control the Senate or the White House. We are not going to get everything we want as long as Obama is President and Harry Reid is majority leader. I think that this is reality, not defeatism.

The Democrats and the entire media (except Fox and the WSJ) from the New York Times on down are salivating with glee at the prospect of a Government shut-down, especially one coupled with a refusal to raise the debt ceiling. There are already articles about how “Boehner wants to shut the Government”.

There is no truth, let alone intellectual integrity, in such spin. Everyone here understands that in such an event the Government would not really shut down, nor would the United States default on any obligations. As others have said, the Government will still have ample revenue to pay interest on our obligations if it simply slows spending on other things.

But most of the media will not portray it that way. While it is true that in 1996 the Republicans did not lose seats, it is also true that, after the1995 shut-down, Gingrich, Dole etc. seemed to lose their footing against Clinton and never regained it. Remember that, in the main, Gingrich backed down to resolve the dispute, not Clinton. Boehner, Cantor, and others recognize this trap and the possibility that it could happen again.

How to avoid the trap the Democrats and their media allies have prepared for us? I agree that we must not surrender our principles. But we must be subtle in how we frame the impasse between us and the left. In my opinion, the 1995 confrontation backfired because the Republicans (rightly or wrongly) were perceived by the public to have demanded changes that were so sweeping that Clinton’s shut-down was preferable. In other words, the Republicans appeared to “overreach”, and Clinton appeared to be “reasonable”. Again, I don’t think that said conclusions were objectively true; I only say that in 1995 the public saw it that way.

Now, the Republicans should adopt an approach that couples two elements. First, a significant spending cut (not just a few billion in unspent earmarks) that slices some score billions or more of spending from this year’s budget. As polls and other commenters have pointed out, the public back us on spending cuts. Second, pick one or two high profile liberal sacred cows, such as Planned Parenthood and NPR, and defund those as well. In exchange, the Republicans would vote for funding through the rest of the fiscal year and raise the debt ceiling.

I recognize that many here may feel that this is too little. But I think that such a modest approach would shift how the public would perceive who is really overreaching, no matter what the liberal media says. I can easily see people saying to the Democrats: “You shut down the whole Government in order to save NPR?” If we can frame the confrontation that way, I think we win the battle of public perception, and that Obama abnd Reid will be forced to back down. Remember also that we start all over again with the budget for the next fiscal year in April, so we have more chances to cut spending and defund liberal priorities.

Start with defunding Planned Parenthood, which means eliminating Title X, then take the two most recent rulings against Obamacare to the Supreme justices that they may declare it unconstitutional once and for all, stop any other bridges to nowhere and get people who have a real sense of fiscal responsibility to be put in charge of the purchasing for our government – no more hundred dollar hammers or three hundred dollar toilet seats…can’t they just go to Walmart and save the rest? Every dollar saved by these measures may then be diverted to paying down our monstrous debt. While they’re considering programs suiitable for budget cuts, how about putting the Space Program on the back burner for a few years and divert funds saved from that to paying down the deficit, too? Do NOT take from the poor who are already struggling to survive as it is. Protect our citizenry while cutting out all the pork and every less than totally necessary expense outside of what’s required for national defense and basic survival. We’ve come back from fiscal difficulties before and we can do it again. We just need for our leaders to get serious about getting the job done, WITHOUT taking from the people’s most basic needs in the process!

TERM LIMITS we are stuck with sending some of these lifers back to Congress rather than give another seat to the left. They have to slither back to DC because they have no backbone. You’d think after being told where to stand, what to do and where to go by Peolsi and her henchmen, these Republicans would want to make a stand against her ilk and show them that they are in control by doing what’s best for the country. It’s time to HAVE SOME GUTS, MAKE A CALL AND STICK WITH IT no matter what BHO and the Dems think. Stop worrying about your career and do what’s right for a change. What would the founding fathers be saying if they were here to see how far this once great nation has fallen because of politics. NO MORE deals or this reaching across the aisle nonsense. You are in control of the budget. Act like it!