And really this is how they should proceed (without the dancing, or with it, why not). No recesses until this is resolved. Could Jim Jordan look any more haggard and rumpled? Let's find out.
Who thinks this is a good way to frame anything? Is there some differentiation between that certain Clapper, that specific Brennan, and any other random, sundry Clappers or Brennans we all know and...well, maybe not love, but still. A Clapper? No, you idiot simpleton wrong-worded dolt – just Clapper! Just Brennan!
Yeah, this irked me. Same as when one of these tools writes "the Pelosis of the world" or "the Greta Thunbergs of the world." At least such turns of phrase let you know you are talking to a person who is not expressing a thought, just a moronic anger. It saves you the energy of arguing!
Well, I can understand "The Greta Thunbergs of the world" if it simply means "the millions of women who have, at one time or another made Andy Tate feel small."
Just cut off their ability to make speeches until there's a speaker. I wanted to puke yesterday when Biggs was running his mouth - kept wondering why this was being allowed. STFU and do your fucking jobs, you incompetent assholes.
I'd have no issue with a short nomination that stuck to pertinent topics, like the nominee's character or qualifications. My complaint is Biggs listing every bullshit wingnut grievance since the dawn of time, along with dire threats of revenge on their enemies. They can do that kind of crap AFTER they get down to business, not before.
Put a stop to the posturing and I bet they'd elect a Speaker in short order.
About the grievance-listing, I was listening to one dude named Chip Roy, complaining that the federal government keeps getting bigger and bigger, no matter which party is in control. And Ol' Chip was PISSED.
That, I think, is the core of the problem, people who just can't come to terms with what's required to be a developed country in the 21st century.
That's an old-school complaint ol' Chipper rolled out, the simple SIZE of the government was an existential threat to Freedom, because, well, it's like cancer, see? It grows and grows and grows and then you're dead! You gotta kill it before it kills you! I mean, they used to harrump about bureaucracy strangling innovation and favoring its own survival above all else, just like the Communist Party, but there never was a coherent theory of the problem, like Marx never had a theory of how the state would just "wither away" when it was no longer needed.
Republicans used to be content complaining about government and degenerate cities, comfortable in their Jeffersonian suburbs with the country club and a Home Depot where you could hire "day workers" to do your landscaping. But they've lost control of the base, and now they're losing control of the Party. They're desperately trying to avoid a reckoning, and seem to be waiting for someone to fix it for them. Very Trump-like.
Might be fun if a Democrat were ever to say, during a debate, "Okay, name a country with a smaller government whose lead you want us to follow. Surely you have some success stories in mind? Tell us about how their economy is stronger than ours, and daily life there is better."
Yeah, I agree that a SHORT nominating speech wouldn’t be bad, and might be desirable in normal times. However, at this point virtually every house member has been nominated once already, and the process has degenerated into a gross parody of Robert’s Rules, so I say scrap the speeches from this point forward. It’s not like they haven’t been meeting and discussing the nominees; there aren’t any surprise nominations who need explaining. Stop rewarding attention-seeking paste-eaters by giving them microphone time.
The GOP goal since I can't remember how long -- at lest the 80s, probably long before -- has been to shrivel the federal state back to what was to the time of implementation of the Constitution, maybe earlier. Between the GOP majority on SCOTUS (Dobbs was nothing if not 18th century horseshit) and the de facto triumph of the Freedom Caucus, the sought victory looks to be close at hand. Of course fingers can be pointed all over -- my favorite these days is the DCCC's small dick energy efforts this cycle: choosing lousy candidates, in some places, choosing not to ensure a candidate in every district (WA3 yet again my example of the stupidity of not contesting every seat), choosing not to hammer George Santos and so on and so forth. But the DCCC is far from the only sinner.
But enough despondency. Yet again the answer is taking the fight local and bringing pressure from the bottom up. The battle on the federal level is being lost (it seems), time to move to where battles can be won.
OTOH, what do I know? I mean, it looks like I'm correct but, again, what do I know?
Maybe try addressing your dilemma from a different angle: what DON'T you know? Once you've determined the entirety of that, everything left is what you DO know. Maths! They're simple! Ask SteveB!
And yes, the fed-level deconstruction is well along. The states and municipalities are self-limited as per lack of money-printing capabilities, so there you go.
Ah, the belief that equity is important, sweat equity not so much. I’m not sure that that’s correct as opposed to what we’re told. And if what I think may happen happens, then targeting is what matters. Misplaced resources won’t do us good.
Didn’t even field a candidate in my House race. In the vacuum, the nobody Libertarian drew 25% as the “other” option for those who didn’t want to vote for incumbent Dust Bunny (R-SD).
The DCCC chose not to support the Dem candidate in WA3, on the presumption that the Republican, a RWNJ who defeated the R incumbent in the primary, would win and they were cool with that. Fortunately, the Dem candidate didn’t care, went on campaigning, and won. So as Howard Dean said a couple of decades ago, it’s foolish not to run a candidate in every race.
Also WI3, an open seat when Ron Kind decided to retire, the Republican won 52-48. I never got a single fundraising email from his Democratic opponent, even though the district is just two hours to the west of me and Marcus Flowers in Georgia, Mark Kelly in Arizona, etc. were all sending me multiple emails a day. Makes me wonder how the Dems handle access to their lists.
Glusenkamp Perez heavily outspent Kent in WA 3. She got nearly as much from the House Majority PAC and Together for Progress as Kent had total. Kent got no money from any Republican groups
If I wasn’t clear, she won without support from the DCCC. Dunno how much the other groups compare both money-wise and non-monetarily. If I understand things, the DCCC more or less signs off on approving candidates, if so inclined, ideally with other support. The other two groups are just contributors, no? And contrary to current beliefs, money isn’t everything. Glusenkamp Perez was apparently a fairly strong candidate.
Yes on the long game. Yesterday I was worried that today would be "Insurrection II", but if not, we must assume the further destruction of the Fed is the goal.
Yes, let them fight. But nothing about this three ring circus galls me as much as the calls from centrists and "pragmatic" conservatives for Democrats to bail out McCarthy. That is laughable for three reasons:
1. When your opponent is self-destructing, step back and stay out of his way. Oldest rule in the book, so old even the Democrats know it.
2. McCarthy is a liar who will promise anybody anything to get the votes he needs. He wants the Speakership so badly if a Congressperson told him he’d have their vote if McCarthy knifed his own wife or one of his own children, McCarthy would say “let me think about that and get back to you.” And that’s me being charitable. He may just ask the Congressperson if they have any preference as to wound placement.
3. Even if McCarthy himself were sincere (pause for laughter) he couldn’t make good on any promises of comity, because he will be a SINO – Speaker in Name Only. No way he can herd his caucus of lunatics, narcissists, bomb-throwers, and morons in a way that enables him to deliver on ANYTHING he promises. Especially given he’s one of the lunatics and morons himself.
One take I've seen is that the Dems are TOO cohesive and organized, a shameful example of top-down conformity, while the Republicans represent True Democracy in all its messiness.
My whole life all I've ever heard is "Dems in Disarray" and "I'm not a member of an organized political party, I'm a Democrat" and now this. Funny how the Dems can never seem to get it right, isn't it?
Someone was on Washington Journal yesterday going on about how isn't it suspicious that one party can only come up with one name, over and over again, out of all their people, I just find that very strange, don't you find that very strange, that a certain party only has one person?
Those calls are a symptom, like the not running a candidate, of a desire to get the status quo back by chanting "Everything is Fine" in the burning building. Having to hide under a desk while armed rioters roam your workplace calling for you to come out no doubt focuses the mind wonderfully, but some of the district prefects in the hinterlands have clearly not gotten the memo yet.
fuckin' A, let them fight! them maybe, MAYBE, some of the brain-dead base will finally wake up to the sheer destructionist tendencies of their right wing leaders. maybe. but I still think it has to get a lot worse for the common clay of the new west before that happens.
One of the problems with the dumb media framing is, as it gives decent people a Shame of the Republic biscuit to chew on, it also peddles the myth that there is a significant difference between McCarthy and his opponents -- which lets the nuts think they're onto something.
I can guarantee that there are tens of millions of people who don't follow politics who just see this as "more nonsense from that damn gubmint in Warshington". IOW, Republicans accomplishing their long-term goal of raising the level of general contempt and disgust that people feel when they think about government. Tell people government doesn't work, then get into office and make damn sure that it doesn't. It's a brilliant can't-lose strategy!
Loving the "solution" taking Twitter by firestorm: the Dems should "do the right thing" by voting with the other side for a "moderate" Republican. As if they could find one. As if it's the Dems responsibility to clean up the GOP mess. 212 for Jeffries til the last dancer drops.
Hear, hear. Like the wags say, the vote for the Speakership is like the Electoral College, the Democrat gets the most votes but people argue that the Republican should win anyway.
And as others have noted for the pundits who choose to ignore the painfully obvious, it’s not like any Republican speaker will be able to deliver anything they promised—assuming they’d even try, rather than just stabbing the Dems in the back.
Brilliant as usual. Noonan will always be the Crazy Jesus Lady even when Jesus isn't in the conversation yet.
Meanwhile, here are a few of McCarthy's concessions we haven't heard about yet that I got from an insider:
- The Freedom Caucus will henceforth be known as the Central Committee and will have veto over all legislation (McCarthy is still holding out on re-naming the Congress "The Politburo")
- a single representative can not only call a vote on ousting the speaker but demand a public soulsearching in which the speaker acknowledges the harmfulness of his crimes, denounces those members who conspired with him against the Central Committee, and requests his own immediate execution.
Pegs is that well-coiffed snotty lady who's been the boss's admin for years, gatekeeper of the executive suite, will brook no criticism of the C-level tycoons, but keeps a half gallon of gin in her desk drawer.
But if not Kevin, then who? Nobody else has put their name forward. The lunatics have made it clear that the only Speaker they'll allow is one who is either completely disempowered or one of their own. None of the rest of the Party is going to support one of the loonies, and nobody will take the job if it has no power and is basically being a puppet for the loonies.
So even if McCarthy steps aside, there's still no real chance to elect anybody else as Speaker.
Interesting that among the names offered up for speaker by the Clown Caucus (Andy Biggs, Jim Jordan, etc.) we haven't seen "Lauren Boebert" or "Matt Gaetz" or "Paul Gosar." It's like they know they're a sick joke, and don't want to provoke laughter.
In the shortest of short strokes, McCarthy reminds me of the sloppy drunk standing outside the nightclub, arguing with the doorman about why he must be let inside despite being told NO repeatedly. That's the only analogy I have anymore because man I have got some serious McFatigue going on.
This has been really hard on the both-sider media, which has taken to saying “House” when the word they want is “ Republican.” “A divided House,” “dysfunction in the House,” “another failed House vote.” Amid all the mainstream opinionating no pundit has Noonaned a better solution: give Jeffries the gavel and quash all the time-wasting garbage-sifting hearings Kevin and the rest are jonesing for. But then what ragging on Democrats would the media have the next two years? Inflation? Gas prices? Immigrants? Harmful but boring compared to Jim Jordan screaming at Merrick Garland and our media, we all know, is built for spectacle and entertainment, not information and explication.
I did see, for the first time in my life I think, a TV news headline proclaiming "Republicans in Disarray." Maybe I dreamed it... it seemed an unusual thing to see.
It is pretty obvious that the last time the crazyfication caucus was this strong was just before the Civil War. I know I'm not the first one to notice this.
Is that pic from "They Shoot Horses Don't They?"
Yup. You gotta dance with them whut brung ya, and lacking them, whatever other random straggler is still standing.
Come Kappellmeister! Let the violas wail! My regiment leaves at dawn!
Wowza ! Wowza ! Wowza!
I watched for free on YT last year. It's really good. Tight. Not an extra moment.
Yep. Perfect metaphor.
And really this is how they should proceed (without the dancing, or with it, why not). No recesses until this is resolved. Could Jim Jordan look any more haggard and rumpled? Let's find out.
Their slacker asses need to start work before noon.
Maybe they need the mornings to work on legislati... lol you got me.
Fellating 20 people takes longer than you think. Kevin's a slow worker.
Yes.
"A Clapper, a Brennan?"
Who thinks this is a good way to frame anything? Is there some differentiation between that certain Clapper, that specific Brennan, and any other random, sundry Clappers or Brennans we all know and...well, maybe not love, but still. A Clapper? No, you idiot simpleton wrong-worded dolt – just Clapper! Just Brennan!
What is the matter with these people?!
Also, groovy illustration...
Clap on
Clap off
The Clapper
Well, it works because James Clapper is universally recognized as an archetype, like saying "A Caesar" or "A Lincoln" or "A Hitler."
Yeah...
You gotcher Caesar, yer Lincoln, yer Hitler – whatcha need now's A Clapper!
UNIVERALLY, I tells ya!
C'mon, A Lincoln and A Hitler are just abbreviations
I'd say all three are, depending on which Caesar you choose. But looked at a different way, J Caesar, A Lincoln and A Hitler all got abbreviated.
With extreme prejudice.
Yeah, this irked me. Same as when one of these tools writes "the Pelosis of the world" or "the Greta Thunbergs of the world." At least such turns of phrase let you know you are talking to a person who is not expressing a thought, just a moronic anger. It saves you the energy of arguing!
Well, I can understand "The Greta Thunbergs of the world" if it simply means "the millions of women who have, at one time or another made Andy Tate feel small."
"Oofed" with a smile...
If we could get the bots to swap the appropriate memes back and forth folks wouldn't have to waste all this time on the internet.
We shouldn't pay these people until the House is open for business. No back pay.
Noonan shouldn't get paid because she's a stupid old drunk.
Hearted for the bots. I used to have a life lying around here somewhere.
Also backpacks.
Just cut off their ability to make speeches until there's a speaker. I wanted to puke yesterday when Biggs was running his mouth - kept wondering why this was being allowed. STFU and do your fucking jobs, you incompetent assholes.
Indeed. No more nominating speeches. Nominate someone and vote. (As though the nominating speeches were worth the price of their hot air anyway.)
I'd have no issue with a short nomination that stuck to pertinent topics, like the nominee's character or qualifications. My complaint is Biggs listing every bullshit wingnut grievance since the dawn of time, along with dire threats of revenge on their enemies. They can do that kind of crap AFTER they get down to business, not before.
Put a stop to the posturing and I bet they'd elect a Speaker in short order.
Listing every bullshit wing nut grievance since the dawn of time is the party platform, the raison d'être, the full and complete function of the GOP.
About the grievance-listing, I was listening to one dude named Chip Roy, complaining that the federal government keeps getting bigger and bigger, no matter which party is in control. And Ol' Chip was PISSED.
That, I think, is the core of the problem, people who just can't come to terms with what's required to be a developed country in the 21st century.
That's an old-school complaint ol' Chipper rolled out, the simple SIZE of the government was an existential threat to Freedom, because, well, it's like cancer, see? It grows and grows and grows and then you're dead! You gotta kill it before it kills you! I mean, they used to harrump about bureaucracy strangling innovation and favoring its own survival above all else, just like the Communist Party, but there never was a coherent theory of the problem, like Marx never had a theory of how the state would just "wither away" when it was no longer needed.
Republicans used to be content complaining about government and degenerate cities, comfortable in their Jeffersonian suburbs with the country club and a Home Depot where you could hire "day workers" to do your landscaping. But they've lost control of the base, and now they're losing control of the Party. They're desperately trying to avoid a reckoning, and seem to be waiting for someone to fix it for them. Very Trump-like.
Might be fun if a Democrat were ever to say, during a debate, "Okay, name a country with a smaller government whose lead you want us to follow. Surely you have some success stories in mind? Tell us about how their economy is stronger than ours, and daily life there is better."
It’s Festivus year ‘round. Why can’t every day be Festivus? It is, for Republicans.
Yeah, I agree that a SHORT nominating speech wouldn’t be bad, and might be desirable in normal times. However, at this point virtually every house member has been nominated once already, and the process has degenerated into a gross parody of Robert’s Rules, so I say scrap the speeches from this point forward. It’s not like they haven’t been meeting and discussing the nominees; there aren’t any surprise nominations who need explaining. Stop rewarding attention-seeking paste-eaters by giving them microphone time.
If they stopped stupid old drunks, a lot of us would be out on the street.
Stupid old *bootlicking* drunk, thank you very much.
You're welcome. Now do the other boot.
I see yer point about Noonan, tho maybe if she was reduced to drinks & tips she'd be just as fulfilled...
Soused is a good word!
Throwing this out as a, like, possibility:
The GOP goal since I can't remember how long -- at lest the 80s, probably long before -- has been to shrivel the federal state back to what was to the time of implementation of the Constitution, maybe earlier. Between the GOP majority on SCOTUS (Dobbs was nothing if not 18th century horseshit) and the de facto triumph of the Freedom Caucus, the sought victory looks to be close at hand. Of course fingers can be pointed all over -- my favorite these days is the DCCC's small dick energy efforts this cycle: choosing lousy candidates, in some places, choosing not to ensure a candidate in every district (WA3 yet again my example of the stupidity of not contesting every seat), choosing not to hammer George Santos and so on and so forth. But the DCCC is far from the only sinner.
But enough despondency. Yet again the answer is taking the fight local and bringing pressure from the bottom up. The battle on the federal level is being lost (it seems), time to move to where battles can be won.
OTOH, what do I know? I mean, it looks like I'm correct but, again, what do I know?
Maybe try addressing your dilemma from a different angle: what DON'T you know? Once you've determined the entirety of that, everything left is what you DO know. Maths! They're simple! Ask SteveB!
And yes, the fed-level deconstruction is well along. The states and municipalities are self-limited as per lack of money-printing capabilities, so there you go.
Ah, the belief that equity is important, sweat equity not so much. I’m not sure that that’s correct as opposed to what we’re told. And if what I think may happen happens, then targeting is what matters. Misplaced resources won’t do us good.
We would only be willing to listen to you if you were getting paid 7 figures to lose winnable elections. Sorry I don't make the rules.
😭
Fully correct.
Didn’t even field a candidate in my House race. In the vacuum, the nobody Libertarian drew 25% as the “other” option for those who didn’t want to vote for incumbent Dust Bunny (R-SD).
The DCCC chose not to support the Dem candidate in WA3, on the presumption that the Republican, a RWNJ who defeated the R incumbent in the primary, would win and they were cool with that. Fortunately, the Dem candidate didn’t care, went on campaigning, and won. So as Howard Dean said a couple of decades ago, it’s foolish not to run a candidate in every race.
Dean was a prophet.
Also WI3, an open seat when Ron Kind decided to retire, the Republican won 52-48. I never got a single fundraising email from his Democratic opponent, even though the district is just two hours to the west of me and Marcus Flowers in Georgia, Mark Kelly in Arizona, etc. were all sending me multiple emails a day. Makes me wonder how the Dems handle access to their lists.
Yup.
Sorry, I initially misread your comment.
Glusenkamp Perez heavily outspent Kent in WA 3. She got nearly as much from the House Majority PAC and Together for Progress as Kent had total. Kent got no money from any Republican groups
If I wasn’t clear, she won without support from the DCCC. Dunno how much the other groups compare both money-wise and non-monetarily. If I understand things, the DCCC more or less signs off on approving candidates, if so inclined, ideally with other support. The other two groups are just contributors, no? And contrary to current beliefs, money isn’t everything. Glusenkamp Perez was apparently a fairly strong candidate.
Washington is a jungle primary state, so that may alter DCCC approval. GP controlled the airwaves and half her ads hammered Kent on abortion
Hey, we value what we pay for!
Don't sell yourself short. That sounds closer to reason than anything in print.
Can’t sell myself shorter than by giving it away free 😂😭😵💫
You could try the drinks&tips route I proposed for Peggers up above^^^
Yes on the long game. Yesterday I was worried that today would be "Insurrection II", but if not, we must assume the further destruction of the Fed is the goal.
What I said: been their goal for decades.
Kenzidor agrees too. So that settles it.
https://twitter.com/sarahkendzior/status/1611443698071441439
She’s something of a treasure, does some great work.
Drown The Government In A Bathtub Full Of Gin
More like crystal meth and opioids, but K.
Didn't a Democrat win WA-3? Checking yes, this is the one won by Glusenkamp-Perez
Yes, let them fight. But nothing about this three ring circus galls me as much as the calls from centrists and "pragmatic" conservatives for Democrats to bail out McCarthy. That is laughable for three reasons:
1. When your opponent is self-destructing, step back and stay out of his way. Oldest rule in the book, so old even the Democrats know it.
2. McCarthy is a liar who will promise anybody anything to get the votes he needs. He wants the Speakership so badly if a Congressperson told him he’d have their vote if McCarthy knifed his own wife or one of his own children, McCarthy would say “let me think about that and get back to you.” And that’s me being charitable. He may just ask the Congressperson if they have any preference as to wound placement.
3. Even if McCarthy himself were sincere (pause for laughter) he couldn’t make good on any promises of comity, because he will be a SINO – Speaker in Name Only. No way he can herd his caucus of lunatics, narcissists, bomb-throwers, and morons in a way that enables him to deliver on ANYTHING he promises. Especially given he’s one of the lunatics and morons himself.
Hearted for the pause for laughter (tho in my case reality suggests more likely laugh for posture).
One take I've seen is that the Dems are TOO cohesive and organized, a shameful example of top-down conformity, while the Republicans represent True Democracy in all its messiness.
My whole life all I've ever heard is "Dems in Disarray" and "I'm not a member of an organized political party, I'm a Democrat" and now this. Funny how the Dems can never seem to get it right, isn't it?
Someone was on Washington Journal yesterday going on about how isn't it suspicious that one party can only come up with one name, over and over again, out of all their people, I just find that very strange, don't you find that very strange, that a certain party only has one person?
I miss my facepalm emoji.
VERY suspicious, and definitely something Congress should investigate if, you know, we ever Congress again.
Investigations take too long.
Metal detectors gone.
Boom done.
Those calls are a symptom, like the not running a candidate, of a desire to get the status quo back by chanting "Everything is Fine" in the burning building. Having to hide under a desk while armed rioters roam your workplace calling for you to come out no doubt focuses the mind wonderfully, but some of the district prefects in the hinterlands have clearly not gotten the memo yet.
fuckin' A, let them fight! them maybe, MAYBE, some of the brain-dead base will finally wake up to the sheer destructionist tendencies of their right wing leaders. maybe. but I still think it has to get a lot worse for the common clay of the new west before that happens.
One of the problems with the dumb media framing is, as it gives decent people a Shame of the Republic biscuit to chew on, it also peddles the myth that there is a significant difference between McCarthy and his opponents -- which lets the nuts think they're onto something.
I can guarantee that there are tens of millions of people who don't follow politics who just see this as "more nonsense from that damn gubmint in Warshington". IOW, Republicans accomplishing their long-term goal of raising the level of general contempt and disgust that people feel when they think about government. Tell people government doesn't work, then get into office and make damn sure that it doesn't. It's a brilliant can't-lose strategy!
Hearted for the common clay of the new west
Sometimes a phrase goes deep
Loving the "solution" taking Twitter by firestorm: the Dems should "do the right thing" by voting with the other side for a "moderate" Republican. As if they could find one. As if it's the Dems responsibility to clean up the GOP mess. 212 for Jeffries til the last dancer drops.
Hear, hear. Like the wags say, the vote for the Speakership is like the Electoral College, the Democrat gets the most votes but people argue that the Republican should win anyway.
And as others have noted for the pundits who choose to ignore the painfully obvious, it’s not like any Republican speaker will be able to deliver anything they promised—assuming they’d even try, rather than just stabbing the Dems in the back.
Murc's law in action.
It's always the Dem's responsibility to clean up the GOP mess. This started with FDR in 1933
“If you want social democracy so badly, you first need to show you’re mature enough to save capitalism, mister. Now go clean our room.”
It's hard to believe Peggy Noonan is only 72. It seems like she's been that age since Reagan.
The gin has kept her as well preserved as a highly polished brown cordovan wagging merrily on a hassock.
Brilliant as usual. Noonan will always be the Crazy Jesus Lady even when Jesus isn't in the conversation yet.
Meanwhile, here are a few of McCarthy's concessions we haven't heard about yet that I got from an insider:
- The Freedom Caucus will henceforth be known as the Central Committee and will have veto over all legislation (McCarthy is still holding out on re-naming the Congress "The Politburo")
- a single representative can not only call a vote on ousting the speaker but demand a public soulsearching in which the speaker acknowledges the harmfulness of his crimes, denounces those members who conspired with him against the Central Committee, and requests his own immediate execution.
- open carry
- armbands (must be designed by a heterosexual)
Strip searches on demand.
Matt Gaetz is VERY curious about what the house pages might be carrying.
Oh, you...
Need to start a pool on who open carries on the House Floor first: (Bobert pays 1:1), and when the first use occurs.
Would the House guards shoot a killer congressperson?
Santos. He'd be re-elected in perpetuity.
Pegs is that well-coiffed snotty lady who's been the boss's admin for years, gatekeeper of the executive suite, will brook no criticism of the C-level tycoons, but keeps a half gallon of gin in her desk drawer.
And who wouldn't, given those background highlights?
But if not Kevin, then who? Nobody else has put their name forward. The lunatics have made it clear that the only Speaker they'll allow is one who is either completely disempowered or one of their own. None of the rest of the Party is going to support one of the loonies, and nobody will take the job if it has no power and is basically being a puppet for the loonies.
So even if McCarthy steps aside, there's still no real chance to elect anybody else as Speaker.
You seem to have missed (deliberately?) that the GOP has taken the historic step of nominating the first Black Speaker. Who's the REAL racist?
[Robert Goulet voice] It's gotta be me! It's gotta be me!
Except that Donalds wasn't nominated until after Jeffries was nominated, IIRC
Thank you. Yes.
Edited to add: "the first Black Speaker"
that we know of...
Interesting that among the names offered up for speaker by the Clown Caucus (Andy Biggs, Jim Jordan, etc.) we haven't seen "Lauren Boebert" or "Matt Gaetz" or "Paul Gosar." It's like they know they're a sick joke, and don't want to provoke laughter.
Gaetz got walked out on today by the OKs while he was nominating Gym Jordan
I wanted to heart this but that might suggest that I approve of something any single one of those clowns ever does.
I thought the Freedumb Caucus was for anybody but McCarthy
I think they're AGAINST McCarthy, but not FOR anyone.
she doesn’t understand ... that the establishment is no more normal than the nuts.
Not nearly enough of us do.
In the shortest of short strokes, McCarthy reminds me of the sloppy drunk standing outside the nightclub, arguing with the doorman about why he must be let inside despite being told NO repeatedly. That's the only analogy I have anymore because man I have got some serious McFatigue going on.
This has been really hard on the both-sider media, which has taken to saying “House” when the word they want is “ Republican.” “A divided House,” “dysfunction in the House,” “another failed House vote.” Amid all the mainstream opinionating no pundit has Noonaned a better solution: give Jeffries the gavel and quash all the time-wasting garbage-sifting hearings Kevin and the rest are jonesing for. But then what ragging on Democrats would the media have the next two years? Inflation? Gas prices? Immigrants? Harmful but boring compared to Jim Jordan screaming at Merrick Garland and our media, we all know, is built for spectacle and entertainment, not information and explication.
I did see, for the first time in my life I think, a TV news headline proclaiming "Republicans in Disarray." Maybe I dreamed it... it seemed an unusual thing to see.
I hadn’t thought of Gary Bauer in years. And Ed Meese is still alive? Meanwhile, Peggy Noonan’s gin-soaked fever dreams… I just can’t even.
I know! It was like ghosts of assholes past
"...the establishment is no more normal than the nuts."...
Word.
It is pretty obvious that the last time the crazyfication caucus was this strong was just before the Civil War. I know I'm not the first one to notice this.
"The past is never dead. It's not even past."