Shutdown!

[Swift]

Apparently the speaker has said he will not let the government default. So that's good, hope he's telling the truth.

If John Boehner told me the sky was blue I wouldn't believe him. I just wrote a scathing e-mail to him, closing with "You are a monster". Hate doesn't do justice to how I feel about him. If it was up to me he would be arrested for treason.

[pumpkinpi]

Can you impeach members of congress?

[Sigma_Orionis]

Apparently the shutdown is pretty popular in Texas

[Swift]

Apparently the shutdown is pretty popular in Texas

I regret that the Federal government won the Civil War. Looking back, it would have been better for the North if they had succeded.

[cid]

Can you impeach members of congress?

Of course you can. You can impeach any elected official. But as the self-styled anarchist out this way found out, impeaching means nothing
without a trial and conviction. He was certain that because Clinton had been impeached, he should have been automatically been removed from office (if not drawn and quartered after being shot and hung).
An impeachment equals an indictment. By itself, impeachment is just an accusation found worthy of being taken to trial. By itself, it carries NO penalty.
You can be impeached and found not guilty at trial, and you're free as a bird ( Impeached federal officials in US history).

Since 1797 the House of Representatives has impeached sixteen federal officials. These include two presidents, a cabinet member, a senator, a justice of the Supreme Court, and eleven federal judges. Of those, the Senate has convicted and removed seven, all of them judges. Not included in this list are the office holders who have resigned rather than face impeachment, most notably, President Richard M. Nixon.

Two U.S. presidents have been impeached: Andrew Johnson, the seventeenth chief executive, and William J. Clinton, the forty-second.

Now, reputations may or may not suffer because of impeachment, but that's a moral judgment, not a legal one.
Too many people think that impeachment by itself solves all the problems. Not so -- it's just the start of the process.

[geonuc]

If John Boehner told me the sky was blue I wouldn't believe him. I just wrote a scathing e-mail to him, closing with "You are a monster". Hate doesn't do justice to how I feel about him. If it was up to me he would be arrested for treason.

Ditto. Boehner and his cohorts have done far worse damage to the country - knowingly and intentionally - than, for example, Bradley (Chelsea) Manning or Eric Snowden.

[geonuc]

Of course you can. You can impeach any elected official.

That's actually not definitely true. It is not clear whether members of Congress can be impeached.

[Cyborg Girl]

Related: something rather frightening I stumbled upon...

http://swegener.tumblr.com/post/6303964 ... te-in-2014

You ask me, this kind of blatant gerrymandering should be considered far worse than the supposed individual vote fraud the Republicans have been harping about.

[geonuc]

Related: something rather frightening I stumbled upon...

http://swegener.tumblr.com/post/6303964 ... te-in-2014

You ask me, this kind of blatant gerrymandering should be considered far worse than the supposed individual vote fraud the Republicans have been harping about.

Weird link, but yes, I agree. Far worse.

[SciFiFisher]

Even weirder is the fact that there seems to be some decent evidence that gerrymandering doesn't cause as much polarization as you would think. It has caused a slight favoring of the Republicans for state races and some increase in the representation of conservatives in the House.

Brunell and Grofman (2005) present evidence challenging a key premise of the
gerrymandering hypothesis. They argue that while redistricting has produced greater
homogeneity of districts and a decline in competition for House seats, they find no evidence that
the winners of homogeneous and non-competitive districts have more extreme voting records.

One caveat. Most of the studies seem to have been done before the rise of the Tea Party.

[cid]

Of course you can. You can impeach any elected official.

That's actually not definitely true. It is not clear whether members of Congress can be impeached.

I'll be darned...you learn something new every day...

Officials subject to impeachment:
The central question regarding the Constitutional dispute about the impeachment of members of the legislature is whether members of Congress are officers of the United States. The Constitution grants the House the power to impeach "The President, the Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States." It has been suggested that members of Congress are not officers of the United States. Others, however, believe that members are civil officers and are subject to impeachment.[citation needed]
The House of Representatives did impeach a senator once: Senator William Blount, in 1798. The Senate expelled Senator Blount and, after initially hearing his impeachment, dismissed the charges for lack of jurisdiction. Left unsettled was the question whether members of Congress were civil officers of the United States. The House has not impeached a Member of Congress since Blount. As each House has the authority to expel its own members without involving the other chamber, expulsion has been the method used for removing Members of Congress.

A Wikipedia history of Impeachments (Federal, State, and Territorial) in the United States.

[Sigma_Orionis]

And now Ideology gets ready to jump.....

US shutdown is starting to hit business, says Commerce Secretary

From Monday, Lockheed will put 3,000 staff on leave, but the defence giant said this number would rise if the shutdown continued.

[Loresinger]

my daughter suggests that for the entire time of the shut down, our taxes should be null and void

[gethen]

Heard a political scientist from Yale on the radio who believes that if POTUS allows any compromise on the health care law as a result of this shutdown, our government will never recover. He said that the law was passed by Congress, signed by POTUS, and upheld by the Supreme Court, and the President who pushed it was re-elected by the American people. If we now allow a minority section of the minority party (AKA: the teabag Republicans) to force a change in it by shutting down our government, we circumvent the very design and intent of a majority rules democracy. And we can expect every minority group in Congress to attempt the same thing in the future, regardless of party affiliation.
Those Republicans who, like Boehner, allow themselves to be bullied by the likes of Ted Cruz into sticking with this unreasonable demand, may live to regret getting this snowball rolling.

[Sigma_Orionis]

Now Boehner says there will be no deal on anything unless there are spending talks.

Boehner vows no deal on budget or debt limit without spending talks with Obama

[brite]

Boehner needs to allow a clean CR bill vote... An up or down vote... If it fails, then it fails... I don't think it will... But those 30 or so Tea Party nuts are terrified that it will pass.... And they are holding a gun to Boehner's head...

[Cyborg Girl]

On the plus side, Boehner is probably making himself look like Darth Vader to business people.

[Sigma_Orionis]

This is about as blunt as I've ever seen the HNIC get ....

“The truth of the matter is there are enough Republican and Democratic votes in the House of Representatives right now to end the shutdown immediately with no partisan strings attached. The House should hold that vote today,” Obama said, daring Boehner to take action.

[cid]

This is about as blunt as I've ever seen the HNIC get ....

“The truth of the matter is there are enough Republican and Democratic votes in the House of Representatives right now to end the shutdown immediately with no partisan strings attached. The House should hold that vote today,” Obama said, daring Boehner to take action.

Let's re-paraphrase that in the true meaning that His Presidentiality had in mind;
“The truth of the matter is there are enough votes in the House of Representatives right now that agree with me and not him. The House should hold that vote today,” Obama said, daring Boehner to call his bluff."

[cid]

Heard a political scientist from Yale on the radio who believes that if POTUS allows any compromise on the health care law as a result of this shutdown, our government will never recover. He said that the law was passed by Congress, signed by POTUS, and upheld by the Supreme Court, and the President who pushed it was re-elected by the American people. If we now allow a minority section of the minority party (AKA: the teabag Republicans) to force a change in it by shutting down our government, we circumvent the very design and intent of a majority rules democracy. And we can expect every minority group in Congress to attempt the same thing in the future, regardless of party affiliation.
Those Republicans who, like Boehner, allow themselves to be bullied by the likes of Ted Cruz into sticking with this unreasonable demand, may live to regret getting this snowball rolling.

The Affordable Care Act (and if that ain't a sizable lie, nothing is) was the biggest example of political irresponsibility that I think I've ever seen. Remember Ms. Pelosi's famous line about "...we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy...”? Absolutely irresponsible -- she shoulda been drawn and quartered on the Capitol steps, after being shot and hung on the National Mall. What happened to knowing what you were voting on BEFORE you voted on it?????

[Sigma_Orionis]

Let's re-paraphrase that in the true meaning that His Presidentiality had in mind;
“The truth of the matter is there are enough votes in the House of Representatives right now that agree with me and not him. The House should hold that vote today,” Obama said, daring Boehner to call his bluff."

That's why they're called politicians.

[brite]

CID... Two questions....
1. Have you looked into the ACA? You may be eligible for free or low cost health insurance if you don't have any... But that's not the real question... The real question is... Did you know that the ACA WAS already funded BEFORE all this started? And... It was a law, for 3 years, 42 attempts at repeal, one SCOTUS decision, and a presidential election, where it was a pretty big deal? In that time, if these law makers didn't take the time to aqaint themselves with what was in the law... That's their issue... Not the rest of the country's... They need to get the fuck over it. (Please pardon the language)
And 2. You do realize that this shutdown is going to hold up federal school funding... I'm using Fishers Post 9/11 GI Bill... My tuition still isn't paid for this semester.... Fun? WOW! It's going to hurt you, Cookie, Norm, me, SonOBrite and anyone else that's getting Pell, and any other grants, student loans or any other federal or VA funding for school....

Just saying....

[Morrolan]

amen, Brite, and not only that, it will seriously damage and reverse the slow improvement some parts of the global economy have made over the past months. Amongst which the US economy.

if you thought the Lehman Brothers collapse was bad wait until this one hits...

[geonuc]

Heard a political scientist from Yale on the radio who believes that if POTUS allows any compromise on the health care law as a result of this shutdown, our government will never recover. He said that the law was passed by Congress, signed by POTUS, and upheld by the Supreme Court, and the President who pushed it was re-elected by the American people. If we now allow a minority section of the minority party (AKA: the teabag Republicans) to force a change in it by shutting down our government, we circumvent the very design and intent of a majority rules democracy. And we can expect every minority group in Congress to attempt the same thing in the future, regardless of party affiliation.
Those Republicans who, like Boehner, allow themselves to be bullied by the likes of Ted Cruz into sticking with this unreasonable demand, may live to regret getting this snowball rolling.

This is one of the reasons I'm so discouraged with the political system in the US right now. That and the gerrymandered House of Representatives and state legislatures. The two are linked, of course.

It's getting to the point that I am starting to think it best for the president to act unilaterally. Ordinarily, I'd oppose that because the next president might not be so rational. But what is there to lose?

[geonuc]

The Affordable Care Act (and if that ain't a sizable lie, nothing is) was the biggest example of political irresponsibility that I think I've ever seen. Remember Ms. Pelosi's famous line about "...we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy...”? Absolutely irresponsible -- she shoulda been drawn and quartered on the Capitol steps, after being shot and hung on the National Mall. What happened to knowing what you were voting on BEFORE you voted on it?????

cid, the ACA was written, passed and upheld for you. Not me - I have good insurance and do not benefit much from it. But you do, or can if you just take advantage of the law.

Pelosi knew well the provisions of the ACA when she pushed it in Congress. Her statement was referring to people who railed against it by making up stupid specters like death panels, etc.

And finally, do you really think advocating the murder of a US congresswoman appropriate in any form or forum? I have had enough of that sort of language from the extremists in the GOP.