The anatomy of a government shutdown

[RavenHawk]

I was going to use this as a reply to “Tink, Tink, Tink” but as I’m writing this and it is evolving, I now think it belongs in its own thread. This is an important message. And the replies that it elicits will prove that it is a Constitutional litmus test.

First things first. We are not a Democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic. Our Founding Fathers warned us of the extremes of Democracy. Ever since the 110th Congress was seated, we have been living that very nightmare. It actually began in 1913 when the 16th Amendment was ratified. And ever since then, successive gains by a string of Socialist Administrations have pulled this nation closer to Totalitarianism. This country is divided because at least half of Americans do not realize this nor do they care. When I have asked people (some have been Ph.D.s) if they were ok with the government having more control in their lives, their answer is that they are fine with it. That leaves me completely speechless.

The House was doing their job. They control the purse strings, not the President or the Senate. If they wish to fund something or defund it, they have the power to do so. There is no rule that states that they need to cave to the President’s wishes. If they wish to piecemeal appropriations, that is their prerogative. This is how they’ve done things for 200 years. I’ve heard people reason that Obamacare is *The Law of the Land*. That is just so much brainwashing by the Left. It doesn’t matter if it is *The Law of the Land* or not. If it were not, they would not need to defund it. Every two years, they have to pass an appropriations bill to support the military. The Leftists would have no problems slashing the Defense Budget.

Art I, Sec 7, clause 1:

“All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.”

Some argue that the House should pass the bill because it is responsible for paying the government’s bill and they have no right to hold that up. That’s the point to defund something. All the House really needs to do is pay down on the Debt. It’s the President that decides how to distribute funds. That is why he made it as painful as possible on the American people. The House was piecemealing appropriations and the President turned that around and used it as a weapon against the people and blamed the Republicans.

This government has no right to spend more than we have. This is not fiscally responsible. But the GOP caved and guess what, someone slipped in a $3 billion appropriation to repair a dam in McConnell’s Kentucky. This is totally inappropriate being bought off like this. In the end, it’s business as usual in Washington. I wonder what McCain got? This is why the TEA Party needs and should make huge gains in the elections to come. I think that the pendulum is beginning to swing back to the center.

Yes, Obamacare is the *The Law of the Land*. But how did it get that way? Was it by bi-partisan means? Shouldn’t the majority of the *people* want this or should the politicians tell us what is good for us? I would think that if it was really good for America, then everyone would be jumping onboard. But they are not. People might be trying to enroll in the exchanges but it’s not because it is a good thing. They are doing so because they are afraid of going to jail (because the IRS is the enforcing arm). But there will probably be just as many millions that will not enroll and just take the penalty. With Premiums and deductibles skyrocketing under Obamacare, the 20-somethings will pay the lesser fee. If we had real leadership looking out for the American people, this reality would give that leadership pause. Is this not reasonable? And as far as the Supreme Court up holding Obamacare, they really didn’t. They only upheld those parts that were in effect.

Now I do tend to think that it would be best for Obamacare to go though because it will collapse all on its own. It will go to the Supreme Court one more time at some point after 1 Jan 2014. In which the tax part will be found to be unConstitutional by the anti-Injunction Act, provided a Progressive Judge isn’t appointed (replacing a Conservative one) by then which will only amount to striping out the individual mandate. Obamacare cannot survive without it. But I wonder if this will be too late? They said that defaulting on the debt would be devastating but if we wait for Obamacare to collapse, it might be even a worse outcome. I certainly hope that the TEA Party will have a plan to pick up the pieces quickly.

If anyone thinks that the TEA Party is extreme, this just shows how far Left they have become. The TEA Party *IS* *THE* grassroots party. The party of the people and the Socialists used the Alinski Playbook to smear them. And very effectively. When will the people wake up and become aware? Confusion is one of the Left’s most effective weapons.

I agree that the House Republicans got their nose bent out of shape, but if we had a President that had an ounce of leadership, he would meet and negotiate with those very same Republicans in the art of compromise for the sake of all Americans. But he didn’t, which reveals his true intentions, which is not for the benefit of the people but for the usurpation of power. Buying off politicians is not compromise. Everything about this narcissist community agitator that the psychologists are saying is true.

With the aid of the MSM, it was twisted around that the Republicans were holding a gun to the people’s heads. In actuality, it is the whole government that holds the gun to our heads with the Socialist’s finger on the trigger. Before we go any further, the government should not be able to hold the people hostage in the first place. So how is it that they can? The more government intrudes in our lives, the more people become dependent on the government we all become hostages to the government. Is this right? Is this what the Founding Fathers intended or is this what they fought against and started a Revolution over? This is a simple question and a simple concept. I’m really not interested in Leftist talking points. If you wish to delude yourself, keep it to yourself.

“You politicians have stayed professionals only because the voters have remained amateurs.” - Mary Matthews (Katharine Hepburn) in “State of the Union” (1948).

[Frank Merton]

First things first. We are not a Democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic. Our Founding Fathers warned us of the extremes of Democracy. Ever since the 110th Congress was seated, we have been living that very nightmare. It actually began in 1913 when the 16th Amendment was ratified. And ever since then, successive gains by a string of Socialist Administrations have pulled this nation closer to Totalitarianism. This country is divided because at least half of Americans do not realize this nor do they care. When I have asked people (some have been Ph.D.s) if they were ok with the government having more control in their lives, their answer is that they are fine with it. That leaves me completely speechless.

I disagree with much of what you say, but I appreciate your going to the effort. Of course the States is not a democracy -- no one is. The thing is a lot of Americans have swallowed the propaganda that they are and that the majority truly rules (with of course a few protections for a few minorities).

I am fine with the government having a great deal of control over me; the opposite is anarchy and economic disaster.

Art I, Sec 7, clause 1:

"All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."

This provision of the Constitution is a joke and only sometimes gets in the way. The Senate must also approve any spending bill, and they can amend it. Therefore where it originates is irrelevant.

This government has no right to spend more than we have.

Is that in the Constitution? I thought the government had explicit power to borrow money.

This is not fiscally responsible. But the GOP caved and guess what, someone slipped in a $3 billion appropriation to repair a dam in McConnell's Kentucky.

Actually it is fiscally irresponsible for a government not to borrow money. You should read your Hamilton. How much is another matter and I would agree the present deficits may be pushing it, but maybe not, since they are not generating inflation. You would do well to read a Dianne Feinstein interview on why the dam business happened and not jump to conclusions.

[DeWitz]

This is an interesting post, Raven. Even without agreeing wholeheartedly, I can follow you most of the way. Where it became unclear to me is when you stated flatly that "The T-E-A Party" is the grassroots party. Unless the tally from last year's election (raw numbers, not Electoral College) are artificial, or lies, or some other form of subterfuge, I think it is numerically accurate to say rather what most pundits, amateur and pro, are saying: We are a deeply divided nation, when it comes to voting.

For every Tea-partier wanting to "take back" the country there is another person thinking the country was never "taken," but just derailed.

So I'm interested in what criteria you use to identify The T-E-A Party as the sole, or real, or genuine grassroots party. What makes it any more grassroots that any other party, or--even--than no party at all (by not registering, or registering but not voting, I think a plurality of US voters belong to that "Fed-Up," "Mad-As-Hell" or Dontgiveadamn" party).

[FLOMBIE]

Stopped reading after "we are not a democracy".

[RavenHawk]

Stopped reading after "we are not a democracy".

Thank you for keeping it to yourself.

[Kowalski]

I was going to use this as a reply to "Tink, Tink, Tink" but as I'm writing this and it is evolving, I now think it belongs in its own thread. This is an important message. And the replies that it elicits will prove that it is a Constitutional litmus test.

First things first. We are not a Democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic. Our Founding Fathers warned us of the extremes of Democracy. Ever since the 110th Congress was seated, we have been living that very nightmare. It actually began in 1913 when the 16th Amendment was ratified. And ever since then, successive gains by a string of Socialist Administrations have pulled this nation closer to Totalitarianism. This country is divided because at least half of Americans do not realize this nor do they care. When I have asked people (some have been Ph.D.s) if they were ok with the government having more control in their lives, their answer is that they are fine with it. That leaves me completely speechless.

The House was doing their job. They control the purse strings, not the President or the Senate. If they wish to fund something or defund it, they have the power to do so. There is no rule that states that they need to cave to the President's wishes. If they wish to piecemeal appropriations, that is their prerogative. This is how they've done things for 200 years. I've heard people reason that Obamacare is *The Law of the Land*. That is just so much brainwashing by the Left. It doesn't matter if it is *The Law of the Land* or not. If it were not, they would not need to defund it. Every two years, they have to pass an appropriations bill to support the military. The Leftists would have no problems slashing the Defense Budget.

Art I, Sec 7, clause 1:

"All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."

Some argue that the House should pass the bill because it is responsible for paying the government's bill and they have no right to hold that up. That's the point to defund something. All the House really needs to do is pay down on the Debt. It's the President that decides how to distribute funds. That is why he made it as painful as possible on the American people. The House was piecemealing appropriations and the President turned that around and used it as a weapon against the people and blamed the Republicans.

This government has no right to spend more than we have. This is not fiscally responsible. But the GOP caved and guess what, someone slipped in a $3 billion appropriation to repair a dam in McConnell's Kentucky. This is totally inappropriate being bought off like this. In the end, it's business as usual in Washington. I wonder what McCain got? This is why the TEA Party needs and should make huge gains in the elections to come. I think that the pendulum is beginning to swing back to the center.

Yes, Obamacare is the *The Law of the Land*. But how did it get that way? Was it by bi-partisan means? Shouldn't the majority of the *people* want this or should the politicians tell us what is good for us? I would think that if it was really good for America, then everyone would be jumping onboard. But they are not. People might be trying to enroll in the exchanges but it's not because it is a good thing. They are doing so because they are afraid of going to jail (because the IRS is the enforcing arm). But there will probably be just as many millions that will not enroll and just take the penalty. With Premiums and deductibles skyrocketing under Obamacare, the 20-somethings will pay the lesser fee. If we had real leadership looking out for the American people, this reality would give that leadership pause. Is this not reasonable? And as far as the Supreme Court up holding Obamacare, they really didn't. They only upheld those parts that were in effect.

Now I do tend to think that it would be best for Obamacare to go though because it will collapse all on its own. It will go to the Supreme Court one more time at some point after 1 Jan 2014. In which the tax part will be found to be unConstitutional by the anti-Injunction Act, provided a Progressive Judge isn't appointed (replacing a Conservative one) by then which will only amount to striping out the individual mandate. Obamacare cannot survive without it. But I wonder if this will be too late? They said that defaulting on the debt would be devastating but if we wait for Obamacare to collapse, it might be even a worse outcome. I certainly hope that the TEA Party will have a plan to pick up the pieces quickly.

If anyone thinks that the TEA Party is extreme, this just shows how far Left they have become. The TEA Party *IS* *THE* grassroots party. The party of the people and the Socialists used the Alinski Playbook to smear them. And very effectively. When will the people wake up and become aware? Confusion is one of the Left's most effective weapons.

I agree that the House Republicans got their nose bent out of shape, but if we had a President that had an ounce of leadership, he would meet and negotiate with those very same Republicans in the art of compromise for the sake of all Americans. But he didn't, which reveals his true intentions, which is not for the benefit of the people but for the usurpation of power. Buying off politicians is not compromise. Everything about this narcissist community agitator that the psychologists are saying is true.

With the aid of the MSM, it was twisted around that the Republicans were holding a gun to the people's heads. In actuality, it is the whole government that holds the gun to our heads with the Socialist's finger on the trigger. Before we go any further, the government should not be able to hold the people hostage in the first place. So how is it that they can? The more government intrudes in our lives, the more people become dependent on the government we all become hostages to the government. Is this right? Is this what the Founding Fathers intended or is this what they fought against and started a Revolution over? This is a simple question and a simple concept. I'm really not interested in Leftist talking points. If you wish to delude yourself, keep it to yourself.

"You politicians have stayed professionals only because the voters have remained amateurs." - Mary Matthews (Katharine Hepburn) in "State of the Union" (1948).

Very good post. Kudos.

You might find this interesting, I sure did.

Link: http://tenthamendmen...e/#.UmACIzAo5oM

Can there be a more fruitful source of dispute, or a kind of dispute more difficult to be settled?

- James Madison speaking at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 on the spending bill battles between the House and Senate that would occur.

As the “Government Shutdown” puppet show continues its run in Washington, D.C., there is power in the Constitution to close down the entire production.

Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution requires that “all bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other bills.”

The solution to the ObamaCare funding fiasco is right there in black and white.

If any money is to be spent on anything, the bill must come out of the House of Representatives. If no bill is approved by that body and sent to the Senate, no money may be spent!

Even though he rewrote the ObamaCare legislation in his ruling, Chief Justice John Roberts (and six of his colleagues) held that the individual mandate of ObamaCare was not a constitutional expression of the Commerce Clause, thereby throwing the whole matter back to the House of Representatives and to the states.

Edited October 18, 2013 by Kowalski

[CyberKen]

The Tea Party IS the grassroots party.

Tea Party members didn't go to Washington to make friends.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChNcaSXoxR0

[RavenHawk]

I disagree with much of what you say, but I appreciate your going to the effort. Of course the States is not a democracy -- no one is.

That is very true.

The thing is a lot of Americans have swallowed the propaganda that they are and that the majority truly rules (with of course a few protections for a few minorities).

Yes, there are perhaps too many Americans that are sheep or low information voters. We are a nation of laws and even the President is not above the law.

I am fine with the government having a great deal of control over me; the opposite is anarchy and economic disaster.

No, the opposite is not anarchy. Government has a proper place – very minimal intrusion. Let me try to explain as concisely as possible. If you consider the political spectrum to be a number line with 0% being Anarchy and then 100% would be Totalitarianism. There is no Left or Right. Every form of government, given time trends toward that 100%. That’s Socialism. That’s Fascism. That’s Marxism. That’s Communism. That’s Democracy. That’s Monarchy. That’s Dictatorship, etc.

And just for argument sake, they start at or above 30%. Our Founding Fathers gave us a government that floats within 10% to 30% and never waivers from that constraint. That’s the concept that the Founding Fathers gave us. They wanted as much of government out of our lives. Only what was absolutely minimally necessary to function. Ever since 1913 and especially during a Democratic Administration, we have wandered out of this constraint by only a few percentage points at a time. It has been so slow that people’s perception has been – oh this isn’t that bad. People do no appreciate what happens when they lose freedom. To them people consider government dole as freedom and it is only enslavement.

Well, critical mass has not been reached yet. When it does happen, there will be Revolution. But those as seen as the enemy will be that group that stands on the original principles of the Constitution. The Constitution will have no meaning to the ruling elite in this nation. When that happens, it will be Anarchy until it morphs into some other form.

When you say that you are ok with the government having control over you, you have just given up your right as a human being. That is why the Founding Fathers came together to free us from that. I am not ok with it. I many cases, I have no choice but there is nothing that says I have to accept it.

This provision of the Constitution is a joke and only sometimes gets in the way. The Senate must also approve any spending bill, and they can amend it. Therefore where it originates is irrelevant.

Just like Obama? It’s obsolete. The Constitution was written never to be outdated. It was written to be simple and basic to survive the test of time. It is those that are jealous and power hungry that wish they could make it obsolete. There are two reasons to study the Constitution. One is to learn how to abide by it and protect it. The other is to learn how to destroy it. It gets in the way because it is designed to do so. So that one person or branch cannot usurp power. If this limit is being challenged, then it must be doing its job. True, where it originates really isn’t all that important. But that it is established and put into the system in the House is very key to how things are done. It keeps us from being a Democracy or worse.

Is that in the Constitution? I thought the government had explicit power to borrow money.

Having the power to do it doesn’t mean that it can keep doing it until the cows come home. In this case, the cows left and died in the wilderness.

Actually it is fiscally irresponsible for a government not to borrow money. You should read your Hamilton. How much is another matter and I would agree the present deficits may be pushing it, but maybe not, since they are not generating inflation.

I’m not saying that there is anything wrong with borrowing money. One year under Jackson was the only time we didn’t have debt. At times we need to borrow in cases of national emergency but not for running the government day to day. Depending on what you look at, there is anything between $17 and $90 *TRILLION* in debt. How much longer is this sustainable? How much debt did the Soviet Union have before its collapse? QE is not a magic pill that will alleviate us from the pain of inflation. In order to have a healthy economy, inflation is something that we must go through. And then learn not to go in that direction again. This is what happens when Socialism tries to mess with the free market system.

You would do well to read a Dianne Feinstein interview on why the dam business happened and not jump to conclusions.

I may go looking for a link but it really doesn’t matter. Obama was railing that there is a proper place for the House to fight Obamacare which it was doing in the proper place. But the Rinos sold out and cut deals. No doubt that the dam needed to be repaired but this was nothing but graft and corruption. This should be a serious wakeup call for the American people. Making deals to spend more is not the answer when the deal needs to be on cutting spending.

[danielost]

Frank, your to used to your government controlling your ever move to be objective in this thread. Your government even controls how you breath.

[RavenHawk]

This is an interesting post, Raven. Even without agreeing wholeheartedly, I can follow you most of the way. Where it became unclear to me is when you stated flatly that "The T-E-A Party" is the grassroots party. Unless the tally from last year's election (raw numbers, not Electoral College) are artificial, or lies, or some other form of subterfuge, I think it is numerically accurate to say rather what most pundits, amateur and pro, are saying: We are a deeply divided nation, when it comes to voting.

Keeping your enemy confused keeps them from uniting. This only benefits the Democrats.

For every Tea-partier wanting to "take back" the country there is another person thinking the country was never "taken," but just derailed.

What do you think getting it back on track is? That’s taking it back. The Democrats are driving us off the cliff. This is painfully obvious, but the low information voter is bending over grabbing their ankles and saying, “thank you sir, may I have another”. What do you think TEA means? It wasn’t originally a reference to the Boston Tea Party. That is just an apropos similarity. TEA is an acronym for (T)axed (E)nough (A)lready? Signifying disgust and distain for the ruling elite. And the longer that the Democrats can keep us divided, the easier it will be for them to usurp the Constitution.

So I'm interested in what criteria you use to identify The T-E-A Party as the sole, or real, or genuine grassroots party. What makes it any more grassroots that any other party, or--even--than no party at all (by not registering, or registering but not voting, I think a plurality of US voters belong to that "Fed-Up," "Mad-As-Hell" or Dontgiveadamn" party).

Well, at least you’ve asked the question – thank you. That’s the first step toward awareness. The TEA party *IS* the "Fed-Up" or "Mad-As-Hell" party. The “Dontgiveadamn” party is what the Democrats hope to see. This is the Alinski Playbook to keep your enemies in disarray. That’s why your last sentence shows that you are confused. The more united the TEA Party becomes, the more outrageous the Democrats will become. Just watch. If the TEA Party gains more seats next year, this is my prediction of what will happen. In order to get our country back will require a high price in sacrifice. But if We The People stay united, it will be worth it. Then we can dismantle the good’ol boy network in Washington.

[RavenHawk]

Very good post. Kudos.

You might find this interesting, I sure did.

Link: http://tenthamendmen...e/#.UmACIzAo5oM

Thank you. The House can still send a Standalone bill to the Senate. And I hope they do that. And I hope that the majority of uninsured realize that they are not Constitutionally compelled to sign up on the exchanges. The web site will get straightened out in time, but I doubt that China will stop its denial-of-service attacks (and there might be others). You’ll see the frenzy the Whitehouse will get into trying to coerce people to sign up. You’ll see obvious bald face lies come out as the 15 Dec deadline approaches. Then come tax time, when people that are not covered submit a refund for the penalty tax, this will go through the courts which should strike the individual mandate as unConstitutional. But I suspect that appeals will send it all the way to the Supreme Court.

[Yamato]

Neocon clashes of civilization and wars on religion you're so famous for rhetorically inventing are expensive. You can't have a limited government when you insist on global military government controlling foreigners and enthusiastically continuing to let other foreigners to control you.

The solution to this problem has no bearing on anything resembling left or right. Ronald Reagan couldn't accept the will of the Congress, the masters of the purse, the same rule of law we're more than willing to blab about when Obama's abusing it, to no longer provide any aid to Contras in Nicaragua and so he set up illegal schemes to go around the rule of law. His lack of Leftness didn't prevent this abuse of power from occurring, proving as always that it has nothing to do with the false Left-Right paradigm.

People who use a fiscally-conservative sounding opinion-piece where they rail about Obamacare and partisan politics simply do not understand the extent of the problem. Obamacare is a symptom of the disease, repealing it isn't a cure for that much larger disease. Picking apart the government into groups of Left and Right isn't going to solve anything. The Right never made government smaller. Republicans in the White House have a well consummated historical record of fiscal failure and when we count the beans, they're even worse than democrats. Trapsing another load of partisan excuses in here for that sad record of failure, notwithstanding.

[CyberKen]

Thank you. The House can still send a Standalone bill to the Senate. And I hope they do that. And I hope that the majority of uninsured realize that they are not Constitutionally compelled to sign up on the exchanges. The web site will get straightened out in time, but I doubt that China will stop its denial-of-service attacks (and there might be others). You'll see the frenzy the Whitehouse will get into trying to coerce people to sign up. You'll see obvious bald face lies come out as the 15 Dec deadline approaches. Then come tax time, when people that are not covered submit a refund for the penalty tax, this will go through the courts which should strike the individual mandate as unConstitutional. But I suspect that appeals will send it all the way to the Supreme Court.

Main problem has been exposed regarding ObamaCare website: The backroom connection between the insurance companies and

the federal government is a disaster.

[danielost]

Stalin was left, hitler was right, and castor is in the middle. All of them were dictators. So the outcome f any government with absolute power is a dictatership. Doesn't matter where you are on the political line. This is why we need to stop obamacare and homeland security.

[DeWitz]

@ RavenHawk-- Thanks for the reply. I'm not "confused" or taking a "first step toward awareness" (and I refuse to perceive that as condescension from you). You sound sincere. I am, too, in my so far unanswered question to your OP: What are your criteria for stating the Tea Party is THE grassroots party? Its Clarity? Sincerity? Ideology? Rigid scholarship? Fiscal realism? Good intentions? Purity of heart? Tax brackets? Rhetoric?

Also, as a 'sidelight,' if the Dems thrive on disunity, how did they win 2 consecutive prez elections? Please fill me in.

[Yamato]

"Affordable Care" is as big a misnomer as "Homeland Security".