GOP: Shutdown shouldn't apply to us

[billvon 2,435]

After shutting down the government by refusing to send a funding bill to the president, they are now claiming that the shutdown shouldn't apply to their stuff. From Salon:

Shutdown Slapdown
====================================
By Dahlia Lithwick
OCT. 4 2013 1:49 PM

. . .District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson has been charged with ruling on the endless, sprawling lawsuit brought by Rep Darrell Issa’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee seeking to hold Eric Holder in contempt for failing to turn over documents related to an investigation into the Obama administration’s “Fast and Furious” operation. The suit has plodded on for almost two years.

. . . In light of the shutdown, DOJ asked the court to delay court proceedings, explaining that its appropriations had lapsed on Sept. 30, and that “Absent an appropriation, Department of Justice attorneys and employees are prohibited from working, even on a voluntary basis, except in very limited circumstances, including ‘emergencies involving the safety of human life or the protection of property.’”

Federal courts around the country have been struggling this week to contend with truly hellish delays in the administration of justice. Almost every civil case that involves the U.S. government has been halted in the New York courts. The ACLU acceded to a delay in a challenge to the Obama drone strikes policy. DOJ sought a stay in a massive case regarding the proposed merger of US Airways and AMR and in the voting-rights lawsuit challenging the Texas voter ID law.

. . .

Nevertheless, the oversight committee filed a motion requesting that the suit against Eric Holder go forward, claiming that the “Department’s Contingency Plan provides that Department employees may continue to work on matters necessary to the discharge of the President’s constitutional duties and powers.” In other words, the matter was sufficiently urgent that furloughed DOJ lawyers should be forced to volunteer their services to work on the case without pay.

In an order yesterday, Judge Jackson made pretty clear what she thought of that argument. At 11 a.m. she granted the Justice Department’s stay, ordering it to get back in touch with her within two days of operations resuming, at which time the legal proceedings will resume as well. Judge Jackson made her feelings about the urgent need for this particular suit to press forward rather plain:

"There are no exigent circumstances in this case that would justify an order of the Court forcing furloughed attorneys to return to their desks. Moreover, while the vast majority of litigants who now must endure a delay in the progress of their matters do so due to circumstances beyond their control, that cannot be said of the House of Representatives, which has played a role in the shutdown that prompted the stay motion."
============================================

[airdvr 200]

Do you really believe either party is more guilty of causing the the shutdown? Dysfunctional congress; they're all fucking idiots.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[rushmc 18]

they exempt themselves (I am talking all of the congressional idiots) from nearly everything they put into place

Why should this be any different???

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Gravitymaster 0]

rushmc

they exempt themselves (I am talking all of the congressional idiots) from nearly everything they put into place

Why should this be any different???

Because it presents another opportunity to bash anything non-liberal.

[rhaig 0]

billvon

After shutting down the government by refusing to send a funding bill to the president, that the senate will approve of they are now claiming that the shutdown shouldn't apply to their stuff.

FIFY

--
Rob

[turtlespeed 212]

rhaig

***After shutting down the government by refusing to send a funding bill to the president, that the senate will approve of they are now claiming that the shutdown shouldn't apply to their stuff.

FIFY

They didn't refuse to sign the funding bill. That was the Senate and the Prez stated that even if the Senate approved it, he would not sign it.

No matter what you say, there was a way to avoid the shut down.

No matter how you spin it, at the end of the day it was the left that made their beds.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Stumpy 256]

turtlespeed

No matter what you say, there was a way to avoid the shut down.

yep - put the clean funding bill in front of congress and stop trying to hold everyone hostage to try and derail a LAW that has been judged constitutional. Easy.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[regulator 0]

Billvon your double standards are getting very kallend-ish..


YAWN.

[turtlespeed 212]

Stumpy

***
No matter what you say, there was a way to avoid the shut down.

yep - put the clean funding bill in front of congress and stop trying to hold everyone hostage to try and derail a LAW that has been judged constitutional. Easy.

They are doing things according to the law.

If it were the other way around, with the liberals blocking something, the usual suspects would be defending it and trying to belittle everyone who doesn't agree with them.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Stumpy 256]

turtlespeed

They are doing things according to the law.

That may be true. However you said there was a way to avoid the shutdown, and that was it.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[quade 3]

airdvr

Do you really believe either party is more guilty of causing the the shutdown?

Yes. And it's not me saying it, it's them, in their own documents posted on-line for everyone to see.

http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/ryanriebe/joint-letter-on-sequester-savings

You can attempt to deny it if you wish. But it's right there from last February and it's date specific.

Please note the signers.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 212]

Stumpy

***
They are doing things according to the law.

That may be true. However you said there was a way to avoid the shutdown, and that was it.

Yes and the Senate could have approved the bill and the Prez could have not threatened a veto.

But why look at both sides, lets just be partisan.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[jgoose71 0]

Stumpy

yep - put the clean funding bill in front of congress and stop trying to hold everyone hostage to try and derail a LAW that has been judged constitutional. Easy.

Well, it was judged constitutional because it was a tax, not a law. Therefore, they are completely within their right to bring it in to question when talking about the budget.

Especially when Obama wants to start dolling out the benefits without enforcing the taxes associated with them (which would be against the law, assuming it was a law).

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[rhaig 0]

my bad...

yes... House was the topic of the OP, and I was referring to the Senate.

--
Rob

[turtlespeed 212]

jgoose71

***
yep - put the clean funding bill in front of congress and stop trying to hold everyone hostage to try and derail a LAW that has been judged constitutional. Easy.

Well, it was judged constitutional because it was a tax, not a law. Therefore, they are completely within their right to bring it in to question when talking about the budget.

Especially when Obama wants to start dolling out the benefits without enforcing the taxes associated with them (which would be against the law, assuming it was a law).

I am unclear as to whether it is a Tax Law though.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[turtlespeed 212]

rhaig

my bad...

yes... House was the topic of the OP, and I was referring to the Senate.

I see your point though.

The Congress is broken. No question there.

But the checks and balances are needed.

They are just doing what they have to.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[rushmc 18]

Stumpy

***
No matter what you say, there was a way to avoid the shut down.

yep - put the clean funding bill in front of congress and stop trying to hold everyone hostage to try and derail a LAW that has been judged constitutional. Easy.

what does a law being constitutional have to do with anything?

It is bad law
Time to get rid of it

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Stumpy 256]

rushmc

******
No matter what you say, there was a way to avoid the shut down.

yep - put the clean funding bill in front of congress and stop trying to hold everyone hostage to try and derail a LAW that has been judged constitutional. Easy.

what does a law being constitutional have to do with anything?

It is bad law
Time to get rid of it

So they should try and get it voted away then - oh wait, they have, 42 times. FAILED EVERY TIME.
So they resorted to hostage taking. Sad really, like kids in a playground.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[jgoose71 0]

turtlespeed

******
yep - put the clean funding bill in front of congress and stop trying to hold everyone hostage to try and derail a LAW that has been judged constitutional. Easy.

Well, it was judged constitutional because it was a tax, not a law. Therefore, they are completely within their right to bring it in to question when talking about the budget.

Especially when Obama wants to start dolling out the benefits without enforcing the taxes associated with them (which would be against the law, assuming it was a law).

I am unclear as to whether it is a Tax Law though.

Either way, as far as I am concerned, they are completely within their right to put in on the table with the budget talks.

It wouldn't be a "clean" bill with out it, especially when we are talking about the budget and this is about to be a huge part of it.

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[rushmc 18]

Stumpy

*********
No matter what you say, there was a way to avoid the shut down.

yep - put the clean funding bill in front of congress and stop trying to hold everyone hostage to try and derail a LAW that has been judged constitutional. Easy.

what does a law being constitutional have to do with anything?

It is bad law
Time to get rid of it

So they should try and get it voted away then - oh wait, they have, 42 times. FAILED EVERY TIME.
So they resorted to hostage taking. Sad really, like kids in a playground.

How is this hostage taking?

The process here is set up to be this way
So nothing moves fast

And this "law" was put into place using procedural back door processes and arm twisting. It never passed the normal process as most other LAWs do

So dont give me the bs hostage taking talking point crap.

And stop drinking Obama ACA koolaid

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[quade 3]

rushmc

How is this hostage taking?

The process here is set up to be this way

Because while the government is set up with a system of checks and balances, none of those checks and balances includes simply shutting it down to have a temper tantrum. The Tea Party minority (and their extraordinarily financially powerful backers) of the Republican Party are to blame here. This is well documented.

IF they are so confident it's the wrong thing to do, then bring it to a VOTE.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 212]

rushmc

******
No matter what you say, there was a way to avoid the shut down.

yep - put the clean funding bill in front of congress and stop trying to hold everyone hostage to try and derail a LAW that has been judged constitutional. Easy.

what does a law being constitutional have to do with anything?

It is bad law
Time to get rid of it

Exactly. Look up "The Lochner Era".

AND . . .

The SC actually overturned the Plessy v Ferguson decision of 1896 in 1954, showing that the SC makes bad decisions based on politics too.

Thank the Gods that we don't have to live with that decision as it was and have moved on to something better.

I am hoping we don't have to live with the new taxes involved in the Flailing, and Failing Obamacare.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[jgoose71 0]

quade

... the Republican Party are to blame here. This is well documented.

IF they are so confident it's the wrong thing to do, then bring it to a VOTE.

Please cite documents.

Obama and Reid saying so is not well documented. The house has been sending over "mini-bills" for them to sign, trying to get out bits and pieces that everyone can agree on, and the Senate has shot them down.

But people are going to believe what ever they want, truth or not.

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[turtlespeed 212]

quade

***How is this hostage taking?

The process here is set up to be this way

Because while the government is set up with a system of checks and balances, none of those checks and balances includes simply shutting it down to have a temper tantrum. The Tea Party minority (and their extraordinarily financially powerful backers) of the Republican Party are to blame here. This is well documented.

IF they are so confident it's the wrong thing to do, then bring it to a VOTE.

So what you are saying is that the Senate that won't consider any compromise, and a President that will veto anything the senate lets through that IS a compromise, (well except for the things that let them look good like, oh, I dunno, Back Pay?), without any possibility of flexibility, is ALL the GOPs fault. Somehow the GOP is holding them hostage. Riiiiiiiiight.

How very biased and closed minded of you to. That party line must get heavy.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[rushmc 18]

quade

***How is this hostage taking?

The process here is set up to be this way

Because while the government is set up with a system of checks and balances, none of those checks and balances includes simply shutting it down to have a temper tantrum. The Tea Party minority (and their extraordinarily financially powerful backers) of the Republican Party are to blame here. This is well documented.

IF they are so confident it's the wrong thing to do, then bring it to a VOTE.
As I stated in another thread
Some peoples perception is their reality

Your post is a good example of this

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln