...how does one start a Whole New Congress Movement? We could start with rallies in or marches to the public squares of major cities all asking people to commit to throw their Senators and Representatives out of office in the next election.

We need to throw a scare into our Senators and Representatives.

Tags: Congressmen, Senators

Views: 1866

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

OK, in the first part, you've explained the immediate situation adequately.

[Steve] What am I missing here? 

[GM] The Constitution, the legislative process, and the attempt to circumvent these things by threatening to destroy the economy and plunge the world into a recession......

From this point forward, you editorialize, and start laying blame.  Which had nothing to do with my question (why does not being able to borrow more force a default?), but you couldn't pass it up could you?  OK here goes.

I've seen legislative shenanigans from both sides of the aisle, procedural maneuvers that make one's eyes cross ("deemed passed" anyone?), budgets that used to be passed as several smaller bills rolled together into one big "omnibus" bill to blackmail a Republican president into swallowing the whole pill... but when the shoe is on the other foot, suddenly it's a constitutional problem?

It's perfectly acceptable, under the US Constitution, to refuse to fund something a previous congress passed.  It happens constantly with multi-year defense and space projects.  No congress may bind a future congress.  So that's not a constitutional issue.  It IS unusual to tie defunding something to something that has to pass; usually what happens is some piece of pork is attached as a rider to something considered a "must pass."

Now the Republicans may be stupid to try this.  Reckless.  Insane.  But it's not a constitutional problem.

By the way, I could just as easily claim that the Democrats' refusal to accept a spending resolution that gave them absolutely everything they want except ONE THING is just as fucking reckless. 

Why is this so important YOU are willing to go over a cliff to keep it?  Why not accept an Obamacare free budget, then push to pass it separately.  If Obamacare is that popular it should fly through, right?  Nope, it's because you realize that it would never pass unless it is attached to a "have to pass" bill like one designed to keep the whole government from shutting down.  And that's why you are resenting this whole subject coming up again, because you know this time you'd lose if it had to stand on its own merits.  (Remember that Obamacare only squeaked through in the first place thanks to browbeating some senators and that ridiculous "deemed passed" maneuver, and that was with the Dems in charge of both houses of congress.)

So you have to hide behind complaints about the process.  Pot.  Kettle.  Black.

By the way, I could just as easily claim that the Democrats' refusal to accept a spending resolution that gave them absolutely everything they want except ONE THING is just as fucking reckless. 

A lot of Democratic constituents who just got health care (or better health care) might see taking it away just as suddenly as they got it as reckless.

Obama rightly sees any attempt at paring back Obamacare as the beginning of a "death by 1000 cuts."

Damn, if only the Tea Party had such power in 2000! That could have offset the fraction of a percent of FL votes that Nader took to make Gore lose the national race. (Whoops, we're not supposed to use the words "win" or "lose", like it's a game. Let's ask the Supreme Court for help, instead...)

Sorry for cynicism. But here's a funny idea! Wouldn't it be ironic if the Reps re-gerrymandered their districts to trade in some far-right support for some moderate support, so their primary winners can also win some general elections?

Just saw a Boehner press conference. He looks like he hasn't slept or eaten in a week.

I don't have time to post it, but here's a take on the shutdown, told entirely with Legos. that I think you'll all enjoy!

Another dead archaeopteryx link.

Yeah, well, you know Unseen - he's still setting traps to try to catch his computer's mouse -

Does that look dead to you? How is it I got there when you couldn't - oh, yeah, competence --


Does that look dead to you? How is it I got there when you couldn't.

You followed a good link?

Got there, didn't I?

Congress's approval is now 5%. Lower than the IRS and Miley Cyrus. Considering the margin o error, the approval rating may actually be zero.

Americans’ approval of Congress, most notably the GOP, hit a second all-time low within two weeks as the government closure continues.

Just 5% said they support the decisions being made by government leaders, while a whopping 83% disapprove, according to the Associated Press-GfK poll released Wednesday.

A mere 10% of the public reportedly approved of Congress hours before the shutdown began last week. The rate was the smallest percent in history that favored Congress, as of Oct. 1.

Sixty-two percent of the public believes Republicans are “almost all/a lot” to blame for the current government shutdown. President Obama and Democrats both received 49% of the criticism, followed by House Speaker John Boehner with 48%, the Tea Party with 43%, and Sen. Harry Reid with 39%.
Republicans again earned a 17%-approval rating from Americans, the same number from the Quinnipiac University poll conducted last week. Seventy percent of the public disapproves of the party now, down from 74%.

And just 23% of the country favors Democrats, a decline since the party’s rating stood at 32% last Tuesday. Sixty-two percent disapprove.

Americans even favored such usual unappealing topics—witches, zombies, jury duty, hipsters, Wall Street, the DMC, and the IRS—over Congress, according to a survey released Tuesday by the left-leaning Public Policy Polling. The government body tied with cockroaches and toenail fungus, but beat the controversial pop-icon Miley Cyrus. (source)

It's even lower than dog poop. (source)


© 2015   Created by umar.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service