[ExI] Tap tap..Hello? Is this thing on? (Or Zombie Apocalypse!)

[Rafal Smigrodzki]

On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Omar Rahman <rahmans at me.com> wrote:

>
> For something written by someone with a sense of humor please check out John
> Stewart or Stephen Colbert.

### I abstain from listening to CC. Their humor is too often of the
servile kind, laughing with the master, not at him.

-----------------
>
> The American system of government is based on a system of "checks and
> balances". The President and the Senate have made it clear that they do not
> accept this "legislation by appropriation" and insist that "Obamacare" be
> funded. The Supreme Court has upheld it's constitutionality. That's 2.5
> branches of government in favor of "Obamacare" vs. 0.5 branches against.
> Time to check your balance I'd say.

### To go back to the initial contention: Congress gave the president
about 99% of the money he needs to run the government. The president
refused to run the government, and shut it down. He could have taken
the money and done his job but refused to.

Do you agree that the president shut down the government?

------------------
>
> Mr. Sowell may be right that "legislation by appropriation" isn't new, but
> he is wrong to imply that this is a sensible way to govern. All we have to
> do to prove this is imagine what chaos would occur if Congress were to take
> aim at the laundry list above 'unless' they get x, y, or z.

### Yes, let's imagine: Maybe, if there was a balance between drunken
sailors and accountants, we would not have about 250 - 300 trillion
dollars in unfunded government liabilities. Maybe, if the doves could
keep the hawks in check, our nation would not have the blood of
millions of brown people on our hands. Perhaps a few refuseniks could
say no to the fifth estate (the permanent government,) and the Federal
Register would be 700 pages, instead of 79,000 pages long.

Would that be chaos? Dunno. But, to quote Mr Obama, "and make no
mistake about it" - chaos is now, and it is the result of our
"sensible" way of governing.

Rafal