Astonishing, but not! I wish that 6 brave Republicans would vote for Hakeem Jeffries and this dangerous situation of "minority rule" could be averted.
The memory of watching the insurrection is still fresh in my mind.
One would think there are six and hopefully more Republicans who see the madness which has overcome their purported Congressional compatriots and vote to sit Mr. Jeffries as he may be the only hope our Congress has of averting what appears to be rampant cases of Rocky Mountain spotted fever, distemper or whatever deathwish has infected the majority.
The speakership vote should not exceed ten times. If a speaker hasn't been elected by vote #10, whoever has the most votes should be speaker. Can you imagine the intra-war this would ignite? In this case, as the twits continue to hold out the rest of them would begin peeing in their pants as the voting approaches the cap, panicking at the thought Jeffries would get it. Then we would see some action....
'Herschel Walker Offers Kevin McCarthy Seven Hundred Dollars to Abort His Speaker Bid'
'WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)тАФIn a possible solution to the stalemate that has gripped the House of Representatives, Herschel Walker has offered Kevin McCarthy a check for seven hundred dollars to abort his bid for Speaker.'
'Appearing at the Capitol, the N.F.L. great said that he had already written the check and hoped that it was sufficient to тАЬtake care of this.тАЭ (Satire, NewYorker)
If tRUMP has been suggested as a Speaker, why not Herschel. He's as qualifies for that as he was for the Senate. He probably claims he already has been Speaker.
Sally that would be great--but the structure of the House is not actually designed to deal with what would actually be "minority" rule as the people claiming to be legitimate Republicans (I have my thoughts about that title) are technically in the majority. However, Constitutionally, since political parties do not appear in the US constitution--they were something the framers really wanted to discourage--this could happen, as all an individual needs is more than 50% to be named Speaker. What would be even better is if 6-8 "Republicans" declared (like that mendacious and ludicrous [expletive] senator from Arizona, Sinema) themselves to be leaving the party and register as "independent" and then say they will caucus with the Dems when it suits them to do so. That would totally upend this whole fiasco.
Well, Jeffries has more votes than Keystone Kev. There have to be some Rs who won in districts that Biden won or won close races who might be interested in such a scenario. My husband observed that this would make it more like a parliament. The scary part of this is the debt ceiling and that would a disaster for everyone. I am amused by Gangrene who is now supporting Kev, probably because he promised her some juicy committee posts. Then there is Gunslinger Blight Barbie who just squeaked by, but is stomping her feet and insisting that she is no Kev. I also saw a pic of a D with a bag of popcorn to eat while watching the dumpster fire.
I heard that the far right fears that the most , a fusion between Democrats and Republicans, brought on by their extreme uncompromising stance on everything. Some Reps actually want to govern , rather than destroy the government we have known for so long. I think this has a good chance of coming about. Fingers crossed.
Me too. I assume there are some sane Republicans out there someplace. But there's the old saying, "How can I hear what you say, when what you do speaks so loudly?"
I am with you and Linda Mitchell KMCO - if only there were such a thing as "brave" Republicans (the few that were left either retired or lost their elections - Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger...). If nothing else, perhaps McCarthy's capitulation to the most crazy of his caucus will finally drive a number of more moderate Republicans to vote "present" - enough to make Jerffies' 212 votes a majority.
Another option would be for the Democrats to negotiate directly with McCarthy, demand that he drop nearly all of the rule changes demanded by the sedition caucus (there are actually one or two decent demands in there), add in a few demands of their own (like ALL budget bills MUST be brought to a floor vote, and equal numbers of Rs and Ds on every committee), and they'll get 4 of their members to vote "present" so McCarthy wins. If he turned that down, he'd be an even bigger idiot than everyone already knows he is.
Gail that is an excellent idea--if only the dopes in Congress would do such a thing. I think that the Dems will get tired of enjoying all the schadenfreude eventually and I would imagine that there are some behind the scenes conversations going on but in the meantime, it is indeed worrying that the Wingnut Caucus is dominating the public discourse at the moment. What also irritates me is that the press has turned totally mealy-mouthed: they are referring to the Wingnut Caucus as "Conservatives" rather than the real moniker they should be using: "Racist, homophobic, sexist neofascists".
Yeah, it really annoys me that they still use terms like "Republican leadership" when talking about Republicans in general, and "conservative" when referring to the inaptly named "freedom" caucus.
And they keep using the word "unable" when the appropriate word is "unwilling" when referring to fact that we have no Speaker of the House because the Republican extremists are intransigent showboaters.
I think the misuse of "conservatives" aggravates me the most. Whole volumes (most recently, in my reading life, George Will's excellent history of that movement) are written on the subject of the American conservative phenomenon and the use of that label. As someone commented on another sub stack, Barry Goldwater would be turning in his grave. Goldwater, with whom I disagreed on 99.9% of the issues, was a human being. These people are monsters. They conserve nothing.
I just started reading Dana Milbank's _The Destructionists,_ which follows the trajectory of the GOP from the rise of Newt Gingrich to the present. Already I'm recommending it, especially to people who think (hope?) that Trump was an aberration and now we can get back to normal (whatever and whenever that was). The right-wing conspiracy machine went into overdrive after the suicide of Clinton aide Vince Foster, and was complemented by the endless Ken Starr investigation of President Clinton.
I agree that Goldwater would be turning in his grave -- but I also wonder if he'd realize the ways in which he helped set the stage for the white-supremacist takeover of the GOP. The conservative emphasis on "small government" may not have been overtly racist and sexist in intent (I'd argue, however, that this wasn't too far from the surface), but it was certainly racist and sexist in effect: government, especially the federal government, has to be big enough to back up "liberty and justice FOR ALL."
Susanna, what a grand recommendation. And, yes, those "real" conservatives laid the foundations for what we are looking at today. People like George Will, Goldwater, a good many of the Republicans who were around for the Nixon debacle, had some ideas, a political philosophy, with which I profoundly disagree, but they were not lunatics or "destructionists" on that account. Just, in my own ideology, wrong. But civil discourse was still possible; there was still room for rational human beings to sit down together and disagree, sometimes passionately. What's been going on for a while now--you're probably right to flag Gingrich as the opening of the door--isn'tl so much a political point of view as the deliberate and malicious negation of any ideology at all.
Racism and sexism, both tending toward violence, are always with us.
My mother cut out and taped to her desk (I don't ever recall it not being there) a Peanuts cartoon in which poor Charlie Brown is holding a football and saying, "For a moment I thought I was winning at the game of life. But then I saw there was a flag on the play."
That's sort of how I think of all our battles against sexism, racism, and the bedrock of all our white Christian bigotry, Anti-Semitism.
Once again, you said this beautifully. They have no political philosophy or coherent belief system any more than does a three year old child. They want what they want and to hell with everyone else.
There is no Republican leadership because the showboaters know how to showboat, but not how to lead. That would take experience, patience, and an ability to be humble enough to learn the ropes. None of them seem capable of that. There is no joy in watching this spectacle. Its boring, time consuming, and counterproductive. I wish they would all vanish down their conspiracy laden worm holes.
As it stands right now, with all the concessions McCarthy has made, his title would more likely be Clerk for the House Republican Caucus and eligible for being fired for 'cause if he spills the Kickapoo Joy Juice of his MAGA-betters.
The Gang of 20 are not conservatives at all. They are extremists. The majority of them are clearly incompetent as well and I do not want them running or ruining our country. They do not have the right to do that.
I totally agree Susan! Unfortunately, it looks like Stinky Kev (a nickname for a poodle I know that seems to fit this situation perfectly) is handing them everything. Which just goes to show what a dumbass he is.
This makes more sense than anything else I've read yet, and I would not be surprised if back-channel negotiations were going on. But your caveat about McCarthy is well taken: he may indeed be too stupid to realize that his goose is truly cooked and that his only hope may lie on the other side of the aisle.
Liking your comment only to add that, in my opinion, McCarthy is, indeed, "too stupid to realize that his goose is truly cooked." Or, I would say, too stupid to realize just about anything. There was a delicious piece in The New Yorker today that described, in some detail, the events and their importance, during the day. The article has a refrain, of sorts, "And McCarthy still sat there smiling." I think this whole show is blood-curdling.
I so agree. McCarthy ran a yogurt shop. He might perhaps once have had a nice smile. But he is not a bright man and he has no business attempting to run Congress. He shouldn't be there. The entire mob should not be there. This is not a circus, this is a national nightmare. America needs to wake up. And we the people are paying their damn salaries.
It must be the fresh air in Vermont, Sally. I too have that wish. It is far more sane than the threat of the crazies gaining power. May six stalwart R's step up to the bar, please! And may Mitch McConnell whisper in their ear that it's okay to reach across the aisle. He did it and got a bridge!
You're absolutely right, Hope. Hands across the aisle is how this country has survived. We have laughed at the back-room bickering and the deals made amidst cigar smoke and snifters of brandy (metaphorical if not literal since the 19th century), but that is, historically, where it happens--the decision, one more time, to lay aside personal and political ambitions and greed so that this American Experiment can succeed for another stretch of time.
Yes exactly. Watching President Biden award medals to exemplary citizens who did the right thing was such a contrast to the self-serving noodnicks (sp) who have hijacked Congress as to be the difference between night and day. Watching Biden laugh at himself, make everyone feel welcomed and loved was beautiful. I have been between tears and laughter all afternoon.
They would be doing themselves and the country a favor, but thatтАЩs not who they are. They would rather negotiate with election denying, home grown terrorists.
With Jeffries as speaker, even with power sharing, the House would attempt to pass useful legislation and would not waste time and taxpayer money with vendetta investigations of the Biden family and administration. That's already better than the destructive narcissistic nihilism that we will get with any Speaker who represents the bulk of Republican priorities, whether the self-castrated Kevin or someone else.
This is what I'm curious about: Why do you think he'd be able to do this? The Republicans would still have a majority, albeit a slim one, and fractious though they are, they'd almost certainly come together to thwart anything Jeffries wanted to do. And Jeffries would take the fall for it, of course. It would be so much better to wait till 2024, when there's a better than good chance that he'll become Speaker with a workable Dem majority.
The Rs are unlikely to simply hand the gavel and its power to the Dems without preconditions. They would have to be desperate enough to do some real bargaining about what happens after that. The Dems bottom line would be basic cooperation on keeping the government running. But it's not likely Jeffries would be the compromise speaker. If it happens at all, it would be a Republican like Fred Upton who has the necessary experience and is as close to moderate as Rs get these days.
That would surely end the speaker's debate. But it would surely be political suicide. Look what happened to most of those Republicans who voted to impeach Trump. Here in WA State, we lost Jamie Herrera Buetler, who was a principled moderate. Reactionary Republicans defeated her in the primary and then lost the seat to a Democrat, which is astonishing for that district. And yes, the memory of watching the Jan. 6, 2021 Insurrection is still fresh in my mind, too.
And Liz Cheney, a principled conservative, got creamed in the Wyoming primary. I agree 100%. For any Republican who needs to survive a primary, "the base" is a major factor in many, many states. The GOP at this point is too fragile to tolerate diversity of opinion, but it's also strong enough to make any dissenters miserable.
I think we need to take the long view. There were a lot of people, myself included, who didn't think much about Liz Cheney until she stood up for democracy. I think there are a lot of our fellow citizens who would be delighted to work with principled people regardless of party affiliation. Democracy is not a one-way street, which has always been its strength.
I started paying attention to Liz Cheney when she came around to accepting her sister Mary's lesbianism and same-sex marriage. This to me suggests that she's capable of learning, growing, changing her mind. So I'm very, very interested to see where her experience on the 1/6 committee takes her.
Well, I'm far from a pundit, but much has been said lately about the Republican party shattering. It has gone beyond fixing. If a moderate faction joined independents, they could still vote with their majority, while doing an occasional good thing, such as nominating a working Speaker of the House. Don't count Liz out either. I'm pretty sure she is gathering family support and big bucks, and she'll run for President in 2024. Or some office elsewhere. If, by any chance Trump is indicted, much wind will be taken out of the sails of the Trumpers who defeated sensible candidates. it's going to be quite a ride in the next months and years. Possibly, even the SCOTUS will be taken to task.
I think we must all work to get rid of the mob so we can get back to the difficult but necessary work of governing. This is not People Magazine stuff, this is real world work. The mob just sees this as a photo op and an opportunity for revenge for god knows what.
This "mob" seems to comprise at least 30% of the adult U.S. population. How do we get rid of it? As to the "necessary work of governing" -- we had flashes of it during the Obama administration, and the Biden administration and the congressional Democrats have done an *amazing* job in the last two years, considering what they had to work with. At this point how many of us can even imagine what responsible governing looks like? Those of us who live in reasonably functional states have some idea, but nationally? You might have to go back to the 1970s or even the '60s to understand what effective government looks like.
Interesting point. The US in the 60s had an enormously strong economy, creating a society that was having many of its needs addressed; unless you were a minority. Do you feel our current economy is that strong? It would have to be, for the comparison to be viable.
The economy matters for sure, but why do you think it's especially important here? What I see when I look at the '60 is a struggle for civil rights that turned vicious, the passage of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts followed by a growing backlash, three major assassinations, a country increasingly bogged down in an unwinnable war (and not knowing why it was losing), and women starting to organize seriously for our economic and legal rights.
The "mob", as you put it, reminds me of the cantankerous, hardy individualist, "I'll do what I please' border marches dwellers who settled in the mountains of Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, and Tennessee during our nation's formative years. Having come from the borderlands that were ruled either by aristocrats and noblemen or feuding families who hated each other. All they wanted was to be beyond the reach of the King's men or the revenuers and they'd kill to maintain that level of freedom. Problem is there no place that remote anymore for them to reside.
ThatтАЩs a bit of a stretch. I wish the moderate republicans would put their foot down. This is setting a bad precedent for the next two years.
I wish instead for a moderate Republican speaker that would be bipartisanly voted into an overwhelming majority. Then, you can pass comprehensive law for the next two years
*Are* there any "moderate Republicans" and/or do you have a particular one in mind? It looks to me as if most of the Republican caucus, whatever their priorities, is beholden to the Trumpers and the Freedom Caucus, or at least they think they are. At this point I don't see the potential for an "overwhelming majority" on anything in this House, or in the whole Congress for that matter.
I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. Why would anyone want Rep. Jeffries to become the Democratic Speaker of a House in Republican-dominated meltdown?
Great question, and I don't know enough about how it could actually work, but at least the second person in the line of succession wouldn't be an election-denier. I am not suggesting that Democrats make this proposal - it would have to come from Republicans - and thankfully, dems seem in no hurry to help fix this mess Republicans have created.
Good point about the 2nd person in the line of succession. I'd never considered the possibility, however remote, of a President Kevin McCarthy. I'm not ready to start now. I need a drink first.
Unfortunately, voting for Jeffries would mean leaving the Republican Party and joint the Democrats, and while that would be a good thing, it would be the end of their careers, even in districts that Biden won.
It might end Jeffries's career too, if he were stupid enough to take the job -- which he isn't. Imagine being the Democratic Speaker in a House whose fractured Republican majority can be united only around making Democrats fail.
What concessions will those 6 (I rather want 10) Republicans require of Jefferies? Could they be senior Republican Conservatives, a delegation, going over only to present a treaty with the Democrats to engage in the work of the Congress? We're I one of those 6, I would seek co-leadership of certain committees and on investigative bodies (these will happen as long as Republicans have a majority) and we would require some other prioritization (say, around border security, debt ceiling provisions, natiinal security) to join a Democrat led coalition.
Astonishing, but not! I wish that 6 brave Republicans would vote for Hakeem Jeffries and this dangerous situation of "minority rule" could be averted.
The memory of watching the insurrection is still fresh in my mind.
One would think there are six and hopefully more Republicans who see the madness which has overcome their purported Congressional compatriots and vote to sit Mr. Jeffries as he may be the only hope our Congress has of averting what appears to be rampant cases of Rocky Mountain spotted fever, distemper or whatever deathwish has infected the majority.
The speakership vote should not exceed ten times. If a speaker hasn't been elected by vote #10, whoever has the most votes should be speaker. Can you imagine the intra-war this would ignite? In this case, as the twits continue to hold out the rest of them would begin peeing in their pants as the voting approaches the cap, panicking at the thought Jeffries would get it. Then we would see some action....
I'd like to see them pee there pants. That's a good one. Worth waiting for.
exactly!
'Herschel Walker Offers Kevin McCarthy Seven Hundred Dollars to Abort His Speaker Bid'
'WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)тАФIn a possible solution to the stalemate that has gripped the House of Representatives, Herschel Walker has offered Kevin McCarthy a check for seven hundred dollars to abort his bid for Speaker.'
'Appearing at the Capitol, the N.F.L. great said that he had already written the check and hoped that it was sufficient to тАЬtake care of this.тАЭ (Satire, NewYorker)
If tRUMP has been suggested as a Speaker, why not Herschel. He's as qualifies for that as he was for the Senate. He probably claims he already has been Speaker.
I believe Santos was a past speaker. I think it was in the Harding era.
That's rich, Bruce!
FunnyтАж gulp
LOL!
I think it was actually during Buchanan's presidency.
/Users/marjbates/Library/Messages/Attachments/11/01/785F5B6E-6E01-4A46-B055-5411DA5CA6C4/IMG_2404.heic
Hahaha
Or better yet, Santos! They all are great at lying! That is a requirement apparently to be a Republican!
Seems so indeed.
Almost spit out my coffee!! ЁЯдг
No that was Santos.
Brilliant and needed. Thanks, Fern! тЭдя╕ПЁЯжЛтЭдя╕П
I was hoping Borowitz would weigh in. I canтАЩt wait for Randy Rainbow.
Glad you reminded me to tune into Randy.
Ah, he will be along soon, I bet!
Andy Borowitz
It is getting more hysterical by the second....
ЁЯШВ
lol
I love this, thank you for the laugh this morning!
Sally that would be great--but the structure of the House is not actually designed to deal with what would actually be "minority" rule as the people claiming to be legitimate Republicans (I have my thoughts about that title) are technically in the majority. However, Constitutionally, since political parties do not appear in the US constitution--they were something the framers really wanted to discourage--this could happen, as all an individual needs is more than 50% to be named Speaker. What would be even better is if 6-8 "Republicans" declared (like that mendacious and ludicrous [expletive] senator from Arizona, Sinema) themselves to be leaving the party and register as "independent" and then say they will caucus with the Dems when it suits them to do so. That would totally upend this whole fiasco.
Michael Moore brought this up on Ari MelberтАЩs show last night.
Well, Jeffries has more votes than Keystone Kev. There have to be some Rs who won in districts that Biden won or won close races who might be interested in such a scenario. My husband observed that this would make it more like a parliament. The scary part of this is the debt ceiling and that would a disaster for everyone. I am amused by Gangrene who is now supporting Kev, probably because he promised her some juicy committee posts. Then there is Gunslinger Blight Barbie who just squeaked by, but is stomping her feet and insisting that she is no Kev. I also saw a pic of a D with a bag of popcorn to eat while watching the dumpster fire.
May it be so. Amen.
Brilliant!!!
Sally, I agree! WouldnтАЩt that be uplifting????
I heard that the far right fears that the most , a fusion between Democrats and Republicans, brought on by their extreme uncompromising stance on everything. Some Reps actually want to govern , rather than destroy the government we have known for so long. I think this has a good chance of coming about. Fingers crossed.
Me too. I assume there are some sane Republicans out there someplace. But there's the old saying, "How can I hear what you say, when what you do speaks so loudly?"
I am with you and Linda Mitchell KMCO - if only there were such a thing as "brave" Republicans (the few that were left either retired or lost their elections - Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger...). If nothing else, perhaps McCarthy's capitulation to the most crazy of his caucus will finally drive a number of more moderate Republicans to vote "present" - enough to make Jerffies' 212 votes a majority.
Maybe this is a little taste of karma for what he did to Cheney and Kinzinger?
Fingers crossed, but not holding my breath.
Another option would be for the Democrats to negotiate directly with McCarthy, demand that he drop nearly all of the rule changes demanded by the sedition caucus (there are actually one or two decent demands in there), add in a few demands of their own (like ALL budget bills MUST be brought to a floor vote, and equal numbers of Rs and Ds on every committee), and they'll get 4 of their members to vote "present" so McCarthy wins. If he turned that down, he'd be an even bigger idiot than everyone already knows he is.
Gail that is an excellent idea--if only the dopes in Congress would do such a thing. I think that the Dems will get tired of enjoying all the schadenfreude eventually and I would imagine that there are some behind the scenes conversations going on but in the meantime, it is indeed worrying that the Wingnut Caucus is dominating the public discourse at the moment. What also irritates me is that the press has turned totally mealy-mouthed: they are referring to the Wingnut Caucus as "Conservatives" rather than the real moniker they should be using: "Racist, homophobic, sexist neofascists".
Yeah, it really annoys me that they still use terms like "Republican leadership" when talking about Republicans in general, and "conservative" when referring to the inaptly named "freedom" caucus.
And they keep using the word "unable" when the appropriate word is "unwilling" when referring to fact that we have no Speaker of the House because the Republican extremists are intransigent showboaters.
Hearing any of the Republicans called "moderate" or even "relatively moderate" makes me crazy.
I think the misuse of "conservatives" aggravates me the most. Whole volumes (most recently, in my reading life, George Will's excellent history of that movement) are written on the subject of the American conservative phenomenon and the use of that label. As someone commented on another sub stack, Barry Goldwater would be turning in his grave. Goldwater, with whom I disagreed on 99.9% of the issues, was a human being. These people are monsters. They conserve nothing.
I just started reading Dana Milbank's _The Destructionists,_ which follows the trajectory of the GOP from the rise of Newt Gingrich to the present. Already I'm recommending it, especially to people who think (hope?) that Trump was an aberration and now we can get back to normal (whatever and whenever that was). The right-wing conspiracy machine went into overdrive after the suicide of Clinton aide Vince Foster, and was complemented by the endless Ken Starr investigation of President Clinton.
I agree that Goldwater would be turning in his grave -- but I also wonder if he'd realize the ways in which he helped set the stage for the white-supremacist takeover of the GOP. The conservative emphasis on "small government" may not have been overtly racist and sexist in intent (I'd argue, however, that this wasn't too far from the surface), but it was certainly racist and sexist in effect: government, especially the federal government, has to be big enough to back up "liberty and justice FOR ALL."
Susanna, what a grand recommendation. And, yes, those "real" conservatives laid the foundations for what we are looking at today. People like George Will, Goldwater, a good many of the Republicans who were around for the Nixon debacle, had some ideas, a political philosophy, with which I profoundly disagree, but they were not lunatics or "destructionists" on that account. Just, in my own ideology, wrong. But civil discourse was still possible; there was still room for rational human beings to sit down together and disagree, sometimes passionately. What's been going on for a while now--you're probably right to flag Gingrich as the opening of the door--isn'tl so much a political point of view as the deliberate and malicious negation of any ideology at all.
Racism and sexism, both tending toward violence, are always with us.
My mother cut out and taped to her desk (I don't ever recall it not being there) a Peanuts cartoon in which poor Charlie Brown is holding a football and saying, "For a moment I thought I was winning at the game of life. But then I saw there was a flag on the play."
That's sort of how I think of all our battles against sexism, racism, and the bedrock of all our white Christian bigotry, Anti-Semitism.
Once again, you said this beautifully. They have no political philosophy or coherent belief system any more than does a three year old child. They want what they want and to hell with everyone else.
There is no Republican leadership because the showboaters know how to showboat, but not how to lead. That would take experience, patience, and an ability to be humble enough to learn the ropes. None of them seem capable of that. There is no joy in watching this spectacle. Its boring, time consuming, and counterproductive. I wish they would all vanish down their conspiracy laden worm holes.
As it stands right now, with all the concessions McCarthy has made, his title would more likely be Clerk for the House Republican Caucus and eligible for being fired for 'cause if he spills the Kickapoo Joy Juice of his MAGA-betters.
The Gang of 20 are not conservatives at all. They are extremists. The majority of them are clearly incompetent as well and I do not want them running or ruining our country. They do not have the right to do that.
I totally agree Susan! Unfortunately, it looks like Stinky Kev (a nickname for a poodle I know that seems to fit this situation perfectly) is handing them everything. Which just goes to show what a dumbass he is.
This makes more sense than anything else I've read yet, and I would not be surprised if back-channel negotiations were going on. But your caveat about McCarthy is well taken: he may indeed be too stupid to realize that his goose is truly cooked and that his only hope may lie on the other side of the aisle.
Liking your comment only to add that, in my opinion, McCarthy is, indeed, "too stupid to realize that his goose is truly cooked." Or, I would say, too stupid to realize just about anything. There was a delicious piece in The New Yorker today that described, in some detail, the events and their importance, during the day. The article has a refrain, of sorts, "And McCarthy still sat there smiling." I think this whole show is blood-curdling.
I so agree. McCarthy ran a yogurt shop. He might perhaps once have had a nice smile. But he is not a bright man and he has no business attempting to run Congress. He shouldn't be there. The entire mob should not be there. This is not a circus, this is a national nightmare. America needs to wake up. And we the people are paying their damn salaries.
It must be the fresh air in Vermont, Sally. I too have that wish. It is far more sane than the threat of the crazies gaining power. May six stalwart R's step up to the bar, please! And may Mitch McConnell whisper in their ear that it's okay to reach across the aisle. He did it and got a bridge!
You're absolutely right, Hope. Hands across the aisle is how this country has survived. We have laughed at the back-room bickering and the deals made amidst cigar smoke and snifters of brandy (metaphorical if not literal since the 19th century), but that is, historically, where it happens--the decision, one more time, to lay aside personal and political ambitions and greed so that this American Experiment can succeed for another stretch of time.
Yes exactly. Watching President Biden award medals to exemplary citizens who did the right thing was such a contrast to the self-serving noodnicks (sp) who have hijacked Congress as to be the difference between night and day. Watching Biden laugh at himself, make everyone feel welcomed and loved was beautiful. I have been between tears and laughter all afternoon.
They would be doing themselves and the country a favor, but thatтАЩs not who they are. They would rather negotiate with election denying, home grown terrorists.
That would be the most amazing possible turn out.
They don't even have to vote for him. If eleven Republicans walk out entirely, or vote 'present', Jeffries would have a majority of the total votes.
I'm still waiting for someone to come up with a good explanation of why making Jeffries Speaker is a good idea.
With Jeffries as speaker, even with power sharing, the House would attempt to pass useful legislation and would not waste time and taxpayer money with vendetta investigations of the Biden family and administration. That's already better than the destructive narcissistic nihilism that we will get with any Speaker who represents the bulk of Republican priorities, whether the self-castrated Kevin or someone else.
This is what I'm curious about: Why do you think he'd be able to do this? The Republicans would still have a majority, albeit a slim one, and fractious though they are, they'd almost certainly come together to thwart anything Jeffries wanted to do. And Jeffries would take the fall for it, of course. It would be so much better to wait till 2024, when there's a better than good chance that he'll become Speaker with a workable Dem majority.
The Rs are unlikely to simply hand the gavel and its power to the Dems without preconditions. They would have to be desperate enough to do some real bargaining about what happens after that. The Dems bottom line would be basic cooperation on keeping the government running. But it's not likely Jeffries would be the compromise speaker. If it happens at all, it would be a Republican like Fred Upton who has the necessary experience and is as close to moderate as Rs get these days.
He could keep the ЁЯжЗЁЯТйcrazy from escaping from the House
Is that possible?
That would work for me! Someone probably informed them of that so they will be there for sure!
That would surely end the speaker's debate. But it would surely be political suicide. Look what happened to most of those Republicans who voted to impeach Trump. Here in WA State, we lost Jamie Herrera Buetler, who was a principled moderate. Reactionary Republicans defeated her in the primary and then lost the seat to a Democrat, which is astonishing for that district. And yes, the memory of watching the Jan. 6, 2021 Insurrection is still fresh in my mind, too.
And Liz Cheney, a principled conservative, got creamed in the Wyoming primary. I agree 100%. For any Republican who needs to survive a primary, "the base" is a major factor in many, many states. The GOP at this point is too fragile to tolerate diversity of opinion, but it's also strong enough to make any dissenters miserable.
I think we need to take the long view. There were a lot of people, myself included, who didn't think much about Liz Cheney until she stood up for democracy. I think there are a lot of our fellow citizens who would be delighted to work with principled people regardless of party affiliation. Democracy is not a one-way street, which has always been its strength.
I started paying attention to Liz Cheney when she came around to accepting her sister Mary's lesbianism and same-sex marriage. This to me suggests that she's capable of learning, growing, changing her mind. So I'm very, very interested to see where her experience on the 1/6 committee takes her.
Well, I'm far from a pundit, but much has been said lately about the Republican party shattering. It has gone beyond fixing. If a moderate faction joined independents, they could still vote with their majority, while doing an occasional good thing, such as nominating a working Speaker of the House. Don't count Liz out either. I'm pretty sure she is gathering family support and big bucks, and she'll run for President in 2024. Or some office elsewhere. If, by any chance Trump is indicted, much wind will be taken out of the sails of the Trumpers who defeated sensible candidates. it's going to be quite a ride in the next months and years. Possibly, even the SCOTUS will be taken to task.
I think we must all work to get rid of the mob so we can get back to the difficult but necessary work of governing. This is not People Magazine stuff, this is real world work. The mob just sees this as a photo op and an opportunity for revenge for god knows what.
This "mob" seems to comprise at least 30% of the adult U.S. population. How do we get rid of it? As to the "necessary work of governing" -- we had flashes of it during the Obama administration, and the Biden administration and the congressional Democrats have done an *amazing* job in the last two years, considering what they had to work with. At this point how many of us can even imagine what responsible governing looks like? Those of us who live in reasonably functional states have some idea, but nationally? You might have to go back to the 1970s or even the '60s to understand what effective government looks like.
Interesting point. The US in the 60s had an enormously strong economy, creating a society that was having many of its needs addressed; unless you were a minority. Do you feel our current economy is that strong? It would have to be, for the comparison to be viable.
The economy matters for sure, but why do you think it's especially important here? What I see when I look at the '60 is a struggle for civil rights that turned vicious, the passage of the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts followed by a growing backlash, three major assassinations, a country increasingly bogged down in an unwinnable war (and not knowing why it was losing), and women starting to organize seriously for our economic and legal rights.
I imagine it's simply because fewer people are dissatisfied with their circumstances.
The "mob", as you put it, reminds me of the cantankerous, hardy individualist, "I'll do what I please' border marches dwellers who settled in the mountains of Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, and Tennessee during our nation's formative years. Having come from the borderlands that were ruled either by aristocrats and noblemen or feuding families who hated each other. All they wanted was to be beyond the reach of the King's men or the revenuers and they'd kill to maintain that level of freedom. Problem is there no place that remote anymore for them to reside.
"Brave" and "Republican" cancel each other out.
ThatтАЩs a bit of a stretch. I wish the moderate republicans would put their foot down. This is setting a bad precedent for the next two years.
I wish instead for a moderate Republican speaker that would be bipartisanly voted into an overwhelming majority. Then, you can pass comprehensive law for the next two years
*Are* there any "moderate Republicans" and/or do you have a particular one in mind? It looks to me as if most of the Republican caucus, whatever their priorities, is beholden to the Trumpers and the Freedom Caucus, or at least they think they are. At this point I don't see the potential for an "overwhelming majority" on anything in this House, or in the whole Congress for that matter.
It would already be enough to take the wind out of the sails of the hot heads and deniers.
I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. Why would anyone want Rep. Jeffries to become the Democratic Speaker of a House in Republican-dominated meltdown?
Great question, and I don't know enough about how it could actually work, but at least the second person in the line of succession wouldn't be an election-denier. I am not suggesting that Democrats make this proposal - it would have to come from Republicans - and thankfully, dems seem in no hurry to help fix this mess Republicans have created.
Good point about the 2nd person in the line of succession. I'd never considered the possibility, however remote, of a President Kevin McCarthy. I'm not ready to start now. I need a drink first.
We don't need to fix their mess but we do need a government that works. I'm tired of the endless Republican shit show.,
Unfortunately, voting for Jeffries would mean leaving the Republican Party and joint the Democrats, and while that would be a good thing, it would be the end of their careers, even in districts that Biden won.
It might end Jeffries's career too, if he were stupid enough to take the job -- which he isn't. Imagine being the Democratic Speaker in a House whose fractured Republican majority can be united only around making Democrats fail.
Really good point.
Maybe, maybe not.
What concessions will those 6 (I rather want 10) Republicans require of Jefferies? Could they be senior Republican Conservatives, a delegation, going over only to present a treaty with the Democrats to engage in the work of the Congress? We're I one of those 6, I would seek co-leadership of certain committees and on investigative bodies (these will happen as long as Republicans have a majority) and we would require some other prioritization (say, around border security, debt ceiling provisions, natiinal security) to join a Democrat led coalition.