too bad we cannot charge them with treason--I truly wish it were possible to charge each and

[niyad]

every member of congress who votes to shut down the government with treason. surely this attempt to strangle the american people because these bastards are throwing temper tantrums, planning to screw over the military, seniors, etc., qualifies.

[meow2u3]

1. But we might be able to charge them with sedition, insurrection...

...or advocating overthrow of government. There is no evidence that the teabaggers started a war with the US--at least, not yet. But there is evidence that they're actively subverting the function of our government at best, and are launching a coup attempt by means of the House, because they simply can't stand it when they can't have absolute power.

[longship]

2. Actually, I am glad that treason is not on the table.

This may be political bullshit, but that's not treason.

Fortunately, in the USA, treason has a very specific definition enshrined in the US Constitution itself. The reason it's there is to prevent it from being used as a political weapon, which the founders -- knowing history -- knew had been common by tyrannical governments in the past.

So, to change the recent bullshit in the US House of Representatives, one is going to have to do it the hard way: vote them out of office.

That's the only way under our Constitution short of some scandal.

[niyad]

5. you are correct, of course. but, sadly, even the repeated scandals don't seem to be having any

effect. and, with the voter suppression laws and attempts, even attempting to vote them out is not going to help.

[bunnies]

3. how can "we" charge them with anything?

Am I missing something?

[niyad]

4. not missing anything--just frustration with a congress that seriously needs to be held to account

for their obstructionism, their hatred, their ignorance and their apparently wilful attempts to destroy people and the economy.

[bunnies]

8. I feel exactly the same way.

I was hoping there was a way to make them pay that I didnt know about. There sure as hell should be.

[Igel]

13. They were in 2012.

And if their constituencies don't like them, they'll be held to account in 2014.

Now, I know that a lot of people would like to hold other people's representatives to account, but that's not typically how things have been done in the US. Unless those "other people" are outside the US, then we're really, really good at holding them to account.

Come to think of it, it seems that a lot more people are really into coercion and compulsion in politics than there used to be. Perhaps it's just I'm noticing more.

[bowens43]

6. How is that treason?

[Blue Meany]

7. Perhaps "enemy combatants"...

I understand that these are whoever the President designates as such.

[niyad]

10. except I cannot see him declaring the pukes as such

[blkmusclmachine]

9. Another stunt to extort vast concessions out of a weak, fickle Democratic Party. And it works EVERY.

F/CKING. TIME.

[Scuba]

12. +1

[JayhawkSD]

11. Yes, everyone who disagreed with Bush

was accused of treason, too.

Is the meaning of democracy unclear? It means we are all entitled to our own opinions. Disagreement with the majority is not treason.

"I disagree with every foul and evil thing you say, sir, and I will fight to the death to defend your right to say it."

[Igel]

14. Yes. The meaning of "democracy" is unclear.

That should have been obvious by the response to events in Egypt over the summer.

For some it's majority rule (tempered by some sort of adherence to a difficult-to-change code, preferably written).

For some, it's adherence to "our" politics, because when it comes to "we the people" we are the only "people" that should count.