Problem for Barry is, Slick Willie was good at selling a fraudulent tearjerker. at this stage of the game, Barry has no street cred. Albeit 37% of the country will probably vote for lackswit again, but that wont cut it.

Shut it down!

"If Obama wins, then the GOP / Tea Party effort is over and the Democrats have won the whole ball game. Obama gets reelected, the GOP is finished as a political party..."

One other major difference from 1995: Look at the growth curve of the national debt since 2008. It has gone logarithmic. Even if the Dems win this cynical game, we're already at the point where a financial collapse is a mathematical certainty. In reality, both political parties are finished. Look at Egypt and plan accordingly. I suggest we are looking at martial law and military dictatorship, probably before the 2012 elections.

"I suggest we are looking at martial law and military dictatorship, probably before the 2012 elections.

2. Posted by John S"

No chance it happens that soon. I tend to figure it will happen around 2016, just in time for the elections that year, just like they happened in 2008, just in time to disrupt the elections then. John Syphilis McCain could have won, up to that point. He could have won even after that point, but his Mavericky predilections caused him to buck the conservative and right path of not bailing out the bad actors and vote for an unprecedentedly large budget destroying fuzzily written bill that was destined to become the new yardstick for federal action.

At one level you have to admire this blog's author's optimism. Sadly, however, it's in large part a function of naivete and of the related issue of being immersed in the detached echo chamber of the Internet's blogosphere.

Unfortunately the parallels between 1995-1996 and 2011-2012 greatly outweigh the discrepencies. To the extent that's not already apparent it will become clear as crystal next January, when the GOP primary contest quickly devolves into a pissing match about various social issues (virtually none of which move people on Main Street), whereas the Obama-Media conglomerate will be busy pounding simple sound bytes about jobs, education, health care and like items, into the empty and malleable heads of the general public.

I certainly hope to be proven wrong, and of course I'll happily vote for whomever the GOP nominates, but I wouldn't bet on anything other than a decisive victory for Obama.

One big difference between 1995 and now - the economy. "It's the economy, stupid" still applies.
Things were ok then, now they are bad. No amount of spin or 'official' unemployment stats or 'official' inflation stats are going to change that. Most people see it and feel it.

Sadly, comments 2 and 3 have some (a lot maybe?) truth to them. Chances of a collapse are better than 50%. When, I don't know.

To quote Teh One, the big difference between 1995 and today is "now you've got me."

In 1995, Clinton had at least some credibility on spending. It should be noted that in the budgets Clinton proposed spending increases were roughly on par with inflation on the domestic side and actually a bit lower once the "peace dividend" was factored in. And he didn't start adopting the hard line tactic until he had negotiated the GOP into a corner (agreeing to some, but not all of their budget cuts, successfully recasting the slower growth of medicare spending as a cut, and tying that "cut" to the tax increases the GOP was proposing).

My point? Clinton didn't just demagouge the 1995 shutdown. I mean, he did, but he got away with it in large part because he looked like he was negotiating in good faith. Obama's posture, by contrast, is transparently obvious to even his strong partisan supporters, and he isn't conceeding ANYTHING. That kind of posture gives the GOP a lot of room to defend a shutdown as necessary to save the country rather than just a small tax cut. Plus, the public's opinion of public employee unions has taken a deservedly huge beating in the last 15 years.

In 1995, Gingrich made some PR mistakes which predisposed the public to dislike him, and
Clinton was certainly more believable on spending - his big tax increase was sold as a deficit-reduction measure - than Obama, who has exploded spending and deficits. But the biggest differences are the public mood, and the Senate.

The Democrats control the Senate. If they block the cuts, it never gets to Obama. But the resulting shutdown can't be blamed on just House or Senate.

The public is fed up with the mounting debt, the socialist health care power grab, and the privileged position given government employees and union members. If the electorate won't support real cuts to set our fiscal house in order now, we are doomed to financial collapse, period.

Now, Obama will play it tougher than Clinton, too. Clinton allowed, as Reagan had before him, "essential services" to be funded by a partial continuing resolution while the big budget fight raged on. Obama won't. He will stop sending out all payments, including Social Security checks, and try to blame the GOP. That will be the moment of truth for America, fully equivalent in our history to the Revolution itself or Pearl Harbor.

If this is "Hope and Change!" I'd hate to see the libs idea of "Love and Peace!"

Never underestimate the SPINELESSNESS of Republicans

Wow, I'm getting whiplash from how fast this site has gone from Obama being an incompetent oaf to him being a strategic genius capable of "finishing" the GOP once and for all. Hysterical much?

The more I watch Obama the more I see Hillary being on the ticket in 2012. If not at the top then as VP out of nescessity to try to get him reelected.

I agree, we could muddle along for a surprisingly long time. In fact, I think we could get to a national debt of $50 trillion before the wheels fall off. But if the Fed loses control of interest rates, $50 trillion could happen in a year or even a few months. Empty grocery shelves and sky-high fuel would add to the tensions and once the government checks stop, watch out!

Last year USD fell 3% while domestic inflation was at 3% having removed house prices from the CPI(added 2005, I think).

BLS flat out lies reporting U3 at 9% using every trick in the book. Gallup has it well above 10%.

Despite no recovery commodities have slipped orbit, mirroring M10 money supply. Fed is purchasing 75% of our debt, propping up stocks by printing $100 billion per month into June.

In China, food is up 5%--over the last 10 days!

Iran, feeling heat at home, is sending a frigate and supply ship up Suez while Nasrallah is "ready for war".

Our Strap-on POTUS is no Slick, and 2011 makes '95 look like 'Happy Times'.

For mee, I am really troubled, and appalled, that politicians, incl Obama even consider this to be a game to be played.
Since when is it ok to play games with the existense of a country?

I've been struggling for years to understand how "shutting down the government" qualifies as a Bad Thing.