Congress under Martial Law

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
From what I get from Congressman Burgess(R), it looks like Martial Law has been declared.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7B4laX1E70

Mister speaker politics is a full contact sport and I understand that but it is a full contact sport in the light of day in the public arena. Since we didn't have hearings, since we didn't have markups, lets atleast put this legislation up on the internet for 24hrs, thats what thomas was made for, lets do that and let the American people see what we have done in the dark of night. After all, I have not gotten any more mail, anymore emails on any other subject than this one that is before us today. Mister speaker, I understand we are under Martial Law as declared by the speaker last night. I think its ironic, house republicans have not been needed for a single thing in this house to assure passage in the last 22 months.


Now is he referring to Martial Law in congress? Or the nation?

Originally posted by: dualsmp
Check this link. Not sure if it is the definitive answer though.
http://www.cbpp.org/7-28-06bud-stmt.htm

HOUSE LEADERSHIP INVOKES ?MARTIAL LAW,? FORCING MEMBERS TO VOTE ON KEY BILLS WITHOUT FULL KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT THEY ARE VOTING ON: MOVE REPRESENTS EROSION OF THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS
Statement by Robert Greenstein
Executive Director, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

The House Republican Leadership has announced its intention to have the House vote, before adjourning on Friday or Saturday, on several major pieces of legislation that are not yet available to House members in final form because behind-closed-door negotiations on the proposals are still going on. The Leadership apparently intends to use a process known as ?martial law? to allow these bills to be brought to the floor very shortly after negotiations are completed, with the result that Members of the House are likely to have virtually no time to examine and consider the details of the legislation before they will be required to vote on it.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
rofl.

Such meaningful insight you have. Listening to the context of the speech, it seems he was referring to Martial Law in the sense of the Democrats ruling Congress.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: dualsmp
Check this link. Not sure if it is the definitive answer though.
http://www.cbpp.org/7-28-06bud-stmt.htm

So basically they wanted a vote before the actual legislation was read? That reminds me of the Patriot Act.

Being that this was imposed by Democrats, this should expose the two party system as being one and the same as Republicans.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: manowar821
You made my heart stop, PC Surgeon. Jesus.

Sorry, not the intention. But I do think this should open some eyes. The rush of voting without Congress being able to read the entire legislation? Since when do we allow this BS? I am more proud of my Congress today than I ever have been (voting no to bailouts) knowing this fact.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,029
2
61
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: manowar821
You made my heart stop, PC Surgeon. Jesus.

Sorry, not the intention. But I do think this should open some eyes. The rush of voting without Congress being able to read the entire legislation? Since when do we allow this BS? I am more proud of my Congress today than I ever have been (voting no to bailouts) knowing this fact.

I'm not so sure they voted "no" for the right reasons.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: manowar821
You made my heart stop, PC Surgeon. Jesus.

Sorry, not the intention. But I do think this should open some eyes. The rush of voting without Congress being able to read the entire legislation? Since when do we allow this BS? I am more proud of my Congress today than I ever have been (voting no to bailouts) knowing this fact.

I'm not so sure they voted "no" for the right reasons.

maybe not, but it still got the result that was needed.

EDIT: Why is there no airplay about this? Why are no media outlets screaming at the top of their lungs about it? You decide....
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Its really no big deal, all we have to do is point out to the various Martials enforcing martial law, that they ain't getting paid either, and it might all grind to a halt.

At a certain point, that cry of comrades, we have been betrayed can swivel all guns the other way. The terror of tyrants.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Sadly, they will get this passed. I think its a travesty to allow backdoor dealings without citizens being informed about whats going on. I'm downright pissed that the media is totally SILENT on this issue. :|

When do we say enough is enough?
 

SlickSnake

Diamond Member
May 29, 2007
5,235
2
0
This is why our little tin pot Democracy has failed the sniff test for the last 8 years. Or maybe even more, back to at least Regan's reign. This is when the Hill deceivers and slight of hand magicians really started in earnest to undermine our Democracy. And what we are seeing now is merely more rotten fruits of their nefarious secret fascist labors.
 

RapidSnail

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2006
4,257
0
0
Originally posted by: SlickSnake
This is why our little tin pot Democracy has failed the sniff test for the last 8 years. Or maybe even more, back to at least Regan's reign. This is when the Hill deceivers and slight of hand magicians really started in earnest to undermine our Democracy. And what we are seeing now is merely more rotten fruits of their nefarious secret fascist labors.

*doo-dee-doo-doo---doo-dee-doo-doo---doo-dee-doo-doo---WAARRRRP---WAARRRRP---doo-DEEE*
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,359
1
76
What is he talking about? He was speaking very deliberately when he said that the speaker declared martial law.
Furthermore how is it possible the republicans are left out?
If our own congressmen are in the dark how blind are we?
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: Perry404
What is he talking about? He was speaking very deliberately when he said that the speaker declared martial law.
Furthermore how is it possible the republicans are left out?
If our own congressmen are in the dark how blind are we?

He is telling us what was previously not known. The speaker of the house evidently declared Martial Law. Not in the sense of the nation, but of Congress. From what I've learned its essentially a tactic to get Congress to vote before the facts/details are known of the bill which was conceived behind closed doors. Burgess deserves credit for speaking aloud what no other did. Now if the fricken media would cover it, this bill would never get passed!
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: dualsmp
Check this link. Not sure if it is the definitive answer though.
http://www.cbpp.org/7-28-06bud-stmt.htm

So basically they wanted a vote before the actual legislation was read? That reminds me of the Patriot Act.

Being that this was imposed by Democrats, this should expose the two party system as being one and the same as Republicans.

Republicans wear suits. Democrats wear suits. That should expose the two party system as being one and the same.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
Originally posted by: manowar821
You made my heart stop, PC Surgeon. Jesus.
Did it make your heart stop in excitement, or fear?

I'm guessing the latter. If martial law came to this country, then real men with real guns start doing things. Not skinny college twerps with their bags of piss showing "the man" how mad they are and spending a night in jail. People really start dying.

 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Man people need to learn how procedures work. The Rep is whining because HE didn't get to participate in conferences. While it's true the majority has a decided advantage, Republicans do NOT operate in a complete vacuum in this situation. They send in a representative who participates (which is effectively recording/noting what's happening) then disseminates this to the other Reps. It's been this way since the two party system effectively ran Congress. The real life disadvantage is that there is a lot of responsibility on the minority participant to get it all down, and there is limited time to get it out. Still it's been this way for more than a century and people have always dealt with it. No one in Congress would have listened to him, because to them he just complained because water is wet.
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Man people need to learn how procedures work. The Rep is whining because HE didn't get to participate in conferences. While it's true the majority has a decided advantage, Republicans do NOT operate in a complete vacuum in this situation. They send in a representative who participates (which is effectively recording/noting what's happening) then disseminates this to the other Reps. It's been this way since the two party system effectively ran Congress. The real life disadvantage is that there is a lot of responsibility on the minority participant to get it all down, and there is limited time to get it out. Still it's been this way for more than a century and people have always dealt with it. No one in Congress would have listened to him, because to them he just complained because water is wet.

I'm not sure you understand what happened here Hayabusa. I say that even thinking you read the entire OP. His mention of "Martial Law" in the sense that it was a forced vote without the entire bills consequences/actions being known. Sure he sounds a little ticked that he wasn't included in the backdoor meetings but he was also pissed the American public wasn't either. A few days before the meetings they released a one page document stating the basic outline of what will happen. I think (rightly so) that all the details behind closed doors should also be released. I find it hard to understand that anyone would want to pass a bill without reading it first. We already did that with the Patriot Act which left me and many others with a bad aftertaste.