So, the Shutdown...

It didn't shut down because the Republicans caved in. It also helped that the Republicans along with Bush went on a spending spree.

And this nonsense about the last three times it was with a Republican minority is nonsense.

In 1995 there were two shutdowns the Republicans controlled the House and the Senate in both cases.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_shutdown_in_the_United_States

Nope, that states what powers are reserved to them, not what means they exercise it by. Given that "the people" are not a homogenous group with a homogenous view on what is constitutional, you still need to explain by what mechanism they should override the supreme court in this case. By civil disobedience? What?

And, likewise, by contrast, and necessarily, which powers are not available to them.

Which powers are not available to them? Every, single, power which is not reserved to them.

Our Constitution was written by people who were in the midst of fighting a bloody war to escape exactly the kind of government we had now.

In consequence of that, our forebears wrote the Constitution to be a government document that would straitjacket a national government and leave it at the mercy of the common people.

That's just what our Constitution does. Never mind how slickly our current government and their media lapdogs try to conceal or gloss over that fact.

Our government does not have the "right" to do what they're doing. Not with Obamacare, not with a great huge assortment of things. Obamacare is unconstitutional. Obama's treatment of any branch of government as if it is above the law is unconstitutional.

A huge chunk of everything Obama's administration has done has been unconstitutional, and on that basis every single unconstitutional thing his administration has done should be immediately repealed and the perpetrators charged under applicable law, immediately.

Ah, he's found the bold and italic buttons...

Sorry, did you want to actually participate? Do you have something that trumps the Tenth Amendment that you'd like to bring our attention to?

You're determined not to answer the question, aren't you? How do the people exercise this power?

I'd prefer to watch you being schooled in your country's constitution by not only your fellow Americans, but a few of the Brits. Carry on.

By protesting the Federal government's unauthorized use of authority.

The Federal government is authorized ONLY to use powers DIRECTLY DELEGATED TO IT IN THE CONSTITUTION.

It is authorized to use NO OTHER POWER. EVER.

Which means that Obamacare is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, as the Federal government was NEVER authorized by the Constitution to compel ANY commerical transaction of ANY kind, EVER.

Obamacare's mandates are unconstitutional. Flatly. Plainly. Indisputably.

LOL. There is no mechanism for the people to decide on it or enforce such a decision in that case.

Yes, I'm sure you would, because you believe in the "supremacy" of the State; however, the United States Constitution disagrees with you:

There is NOTHING in the United States Constitution which gives the United States Federal government the power to compel individuals to make commercial purchases.

Obamacare's individual mandate is clearly unconstitutional.

Yes, there is. We storm the Capital and blow them away. Decision enforced. Alternately, of course, they remember who the fuck they work for and walk it back because we tell them to.

When do you plan on doing this?

^After he's finished telling the rest of us what we really think.

Each party knows how many witnesses they will call and how long, approximately, their direct examination will take. Double that to account for cross.

Then you can elicit about 5.5 hours of testimony per day, save some time (1-2 days) for opening/closing, then account for holidays, judicial conflict, witness conflict, attorney conflict days, and bam, 2 months. If this is over by Thanksgiving I'll be surprised.

I'm just going to throw this out there: Article 1, section 8:

Just because some people around here have some fuzzy logic circuits.

All of you supporting the shutdown should immediately call your payroll office and have them stop your paycheck until such time as the shutdown is over.

Or is it easier to make a moral stand when it's someone else's livelihood on the line?

In all fairness, as a government employee, this is a risk I take. In fact, about ten years ago I was part of a class action suit that sued over back pay in a somewhat similar situation and we won.

I must say I never thought of it that way. Very interesting.

I'm responding to Faceman about how long a trial will last. I'm having trouble posting when quoting for some reason.

The House thinks so.

Fearless on my breath.

So you'd like to see someone who is defending everyone's rights, including yours, to be free of government meddling be defeated.

You know what you should do? Go commit a violent crime, then turn yourself in.

Because exactly the lifestyle you want is available to you -- in prison.

As for the rest of us? Leave us out of it.

If you want to be a prisoner, or a slave, you go pursue that. Leave the rest of us out.

No one's stopping you from leaving. Declare your Independence!

Actually I'm rather enjoying the time off. What you're seeing is not gridlock. It's the Republican party trying very hard to self-destruct.

Apropos of Lanzman's post:

"Trying" ??

Yes, trying. They won't actually succeed until the next election.

We're no better off either way.

Except they are not the minority party in the House, which, as it happens, has the constitutional authority of the purse. They are completely within their rights to say "this is how we elect to spend taxpayer dollars"

It's true they don't have the power in the senate or the executive to make it stick, but that doesn't make it illigitimate for them to try.In point of fact, the Administration has arbitrarily issued waivers and delays on various parts of the ACA - which quite possibly they don't even have the authority to do, so the pattern is already established that changing the law on the fly is acceptable to the Democrats. The Republicans are simply offering thier own alterations.

and they have made concessions on what they asked for at least twice and, I believe, 3 times.

Likewise, it is the responsibility of the Senate to negotiate with the House and find a compromise position on budgetary matters. That they refuse to do so meakes them 50% responsible for the shutdown nonsense.

the argument that they do not HAVE to tie this to the CR is true, but irrelevant. Each house is obliged to take seriously that which is submitted by the other. Neither is doing their job if they stomp their foot and say "no fair!"

I wish that was true... but the Republicans are so good at gerrymandering, it still might not matter.

you don't count the 7 or 8 times it shut down under the Reagan/Bush years?