I do agree with TNE to a point. That said, I do think it's reasonable to say essentially both...that they want an extension so that IF it has to roll out, that it can be rolled out fairly and efficiently across the board AND if possible they can try to stop it entirely.
I do find it funny how the Democrats are attepmting to paint this singularly as a dereliction of duty on the part of the republicans and comparing them to terrorists or hostage takers for using the shut down as a leverage point. The only reason it's GOTTEN to this point and it's actually viable that the government might shut down is because the congress, Senate LARGELY included, has been entirely derelict of their duty to PASS A BUDGET. For FIVE YEARS now this congress has been completely unable to fulfill one of it's most basic tasks...to pass a BUDGET.
I can agree with the notion that an EMERGENCY CR, to give time to actually pass a budget, should be a clean bill. Something to simply "continue" what's going on now as the debate is raging on.
This is not what this is. You do not have "EMERGENCY" continuing resolutions for going on FIVE YEARS.
The President suggested on NPR that he shouldn't be asked to give up anything to "Fund the government". That's ridiculous in an over arching notion. Budgets ABSOLUTELY have been built upon and created with the notion of compromise and each side giving a bit on what they want. The problem is that for FIVE YEARS, this congress has refused to actually pass a budget up to the Presidents desk. They keep relying on these last minute "emergency" continuing resolutions to simply roll over the same "emergency stimulous" related increased spending because they can claim that it needs to be a "clean" bill.
No, when you routinely and CONTINUALLY utilize a Continuing Resolution as your defacto Budget you DON'T get the ability to demand that "Clean" bills are the only thing you'll take. When you're CONTINUALLY throw a "temper tantrum" over actually passing a Budget, you don't get to then complain about others throwing a "temper tantrum" when they don't just roll over and let your earlier tantrum off the hook.
Both sides need to be strung up for this and the focus on one side is ridiculous. Actually pass a ****ing budget for once in HALF A DECADE, through the normal means of give and take, and then perhaps there'd be a good faith reason to put forward short term CR's if a little more debate was needed. But when you ROUTINELY show you will absolutely NOT participate in the budgetary process then I can't fault the House, whose only real power IS the purse strings, to attempt to utilize the only actual pseudo-budgetary bill that the Senate will allow to come to the table.