The 118th United States Congress

[gehringer_2]

1 hour ago, mtutiger said:

Going out on a limb here, but outside of being a prodigious fundraiser, McCarthy otherwise seems like a really untalented politician...

This was the pretty much the take on him before he ran for Speaker.  He does have one sort of striking feature I noticed with all the video of him this week, and that is his absolute stillness when he pauses while speaking. It's almost mesmerizing in a weird way. I was checking my internet connection to see if my feed was freezing.

[CMRivdogs]

Another tidbit from the Bullwerk

Quote

Imagine that it was the Democrats yesterday. Imagine that Pramila Jayapal and Cori Bush had forced Nancy Pelosi out of the speaker’s chair.

What would the reaction have been?

Dems in Disarray!

Let me channel it for you:

Democrats are controlled by their far-left who are totally out of touch with mainstream voters. This is why you got Trump the first time. White working-class voters see that Democrats have no interest in their real lives because they’re captive to progressive radicals. Republicans are going to crush them in 2024 and it will be Democrats’ own fault when Trump returns to power.

Sound about right? Did I miss anything?

Yet when Matt Gaetz holds the Republican majority hostage in the House and forces the ejection of the speaker because he made a deal to avoid a government shutdown the reaction is more along the lines of . . .

Hell’s bells Martha, this is unfortunate. Going to be a lot of chaos. But, you know, that’s how Republicans are. Oh well.

So raise your hand if you think Republicans will pay an electoral price for this debacle. Or if you think that this instance of Republicans’ failure to govern will cost Donald Trump any votes when he faces Joe Biden?

Please understand that this isn’t a complaint about media bias (though that’s real). It’s a complaint about voter bias. The public has asymmetric attitudes about Republicans and Democrats baked into their worldview.

And this asymmetry is creating a danger for democracy.

https://www.threads.net/@timmillergram/post/Cx_ATWVOEQn/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

 

 

[CMRivdogs]

Maybe time to make more popcorn

 

 

[1984Echoes]

20 hours ago, MIguy said:

I'm still in favor of Trump as Speaker.   Might as well have the highest level of chaos possible with the Republican party.  

Dems should nominate:
 

ADAM KINZINGER!!!

[Tigeraholic1]

This is such a **** show.... I hope every Red Hat loses their re-election. Such dumb babies.

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, CMRivdogs said:

Another tidbit from the Bullwerk

 

That’s because people have lower expectations of the Republicans than they do of the Democrats.

It’s like when your bad kid talks your good kid into something like setting a fire in your garbage can and you catch them red-handed. Your bad kid is just doing what you already knew he would, so you roll your eyes and throw up your hands because you don’t know what you can do with him. But you’re mad at hell at the good kid because damn it, he knows better, so you’re going to punish him for it because you know he’s gonna get the message and straighten up and fly right. 

[1984Echoes]

27 minutes ago, chasfh said:

That’s because people have lower expectations of the Republicans than they do of the Democrats.

It’s like when your bad kid talks your good kid into something like setting a fire in your garbage can and you catch them red-handed. Your bad kid is just doing what you already knew he would, so you roll your eyes and throw up your hands because you don’t know what you can do with him. But you’re mad at hell at the good kid because damn it, he knows better, so you’re going to punish him for it because you know he’s gonna get the message and straighten up and fly right. 

That's a damn fine analogy.

But I think it's time the bad child in this scenario needs a spanking.

I volunteer to hand out punishments...

[pfife]

3 hours ago, CMRivdogs said:

Maybe time to make more popcorn

 

 

Mid off

[CMRivdogs]

To quote a popular tv show.

”You are not serious people”

Edited October 4, 2023 by CMRivdogs

[pfife]

2 hours ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

This is such a **** show.... I hope every Red Hat loses their re-election. Such dumb babies.

****shows stop, point, and laugh at this

[gehringer_2]

3 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

Dems should nominate:
 

ADAM KINZINGER!!!

actually an interesting gambit might be for the Dems to nominate Mitt Romney. I've never agreed with any of his politics but I do trust he would be an honest broker and you might get enough GOP crossovers for it to happen.

[mtutiger]

36 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

actually an interesting gambit might be for the Dems to nominate Mitt Romney. I've never agreed with any of his politics but I do trust he would be an honest broker and you might get enough GOP crossovers for it to happen.

Fred Upton is the name most floated in this instance... although he lobbed a bomb at McCarthy on cable news, so that probably won't happen 

Edited October 4, 2023 by mtutiger

[pfife]

Tim Burchett is on cspan right now and he's being pretty transparent about what is going on in the house GOP.   Interesting listen.   

Hard to conclude it's the democrats fault listening to this.

[chasfh]

14 minutes ago, pfife said:

Tim Burchett is on cspan right now and he's being pretty transparent about what is going on in the house GOP.   Interesting listen.   

Hard to conclude it's the democrats fault listening to this.

They have to figure out what their marching orders are here, since they just assumed there was no other possible outcome except Democrats taking their bait, voting against the CR, voting for McCarthy, and taking the blame for everything.

[pfife]

2 minutes ago, chasfh said:

They have to figure out what their marching orders are here, since they just assumed there was no other possible outcome except Democrats taking their bait, voting against the CR, voting for McCarthy, and taking the blame for everything.

They did basically ****can the only entity that seemed to be a rudder on this now rudderless ship.    That said, I still would have expected the congressman to be less transparent about the ridiculousness of the gop tactics and strategy that was happening. 

Later in the segment he says some standard republic party red meat and called the dude who shot Scalise a "Democrat terrorist"  but alas overall a way better gop congressman segment than the many other I've endured. 

[chasfh]

4 minutes ago, pfife said:

They did basically ****can the only entity that seemed to be a rudder on this now rudderless ship.    That said, I still would have expected the congressman to be less transparent about the ridiculousness of the gop tactics and strategy that was happening. 

Later in the segment he says some standard republic party red meat and called the dude who shot Scalise a "Democrat terrorist"  but alas overall a way better gop congressman segment than the many other I've endured. 

Was the shooter a Democratic Party operative? I never heard that. The only connection to Democrat that I could find for the guy was that his hometown newspaper was the Belleville News-Democrat.

[ewsieg]

33 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Was the shooter a Democratic Party operative? I never heard that. The only connection to Democrat that I could find for the guy was that his hometown newspaper was the Belleville News-Democrat.

He volunteered for Sanders presidential campaign, seems quite a bit of a jump from that to 'operative' though.

[pfife]

My recollection of the shooter matches Esweigs.

I think the congressman was just taking a gratuitous shot with the adjective he used.

[Mr.TaterSalad]

[Mr.TaterSalad]

If the Republicans vote in Gym Jordan as Speaker of the House that would mean in the last 20 years that 2 of the 4 Republican Speakers would be involved in either molesting or covering up the molestation of kids. The moral majority and party of family values, a party so worried about LGBTQ people grooming our children, would have Speakers of the House that were involved in either molesting or covering up the molestation of kids. You'd think for a party that prides itself on caring about children that they would not want a Speaker of the House who was involved in either molesting or covering up the molestation of kids. I guess being involved in either molesting or covering up the molestation of kids isn't that important to Republican voters, politicians, and their paid for media.

Edited October 5, 2023 by Mr.TaterSalad

[chasfh]

23 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

He volunteered for Sanders presidential campaign, seems quite a bit of a jump from that to 'operative' though.

Well, the congressmen did refer to him as a "Democrat terrorist", suggesting he is operating on behalf of the Democratic Party. Unless you're suggesting it was he taking a bit of a jump?

[ewsieg]

5 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Well, the congressmen did refer to him as a "Democrat terrorist", suggesting he is operating on behalf of the Democratic Party. Unless you're suggesting it was he taking a bit of a jump?

I read up from the bottom and just saw you mention democratic operative.  I wrote that assuming the congressman said it and I felt that was a bit of a jump.  Sounds like he was a democrat and I can understand the reasoning of calling someone that does a mass shooting a terrorist, so I guess he's not wrong, but as pfife said it was a gratuitous shot with the adjective he used.

[chasfh]

3 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

I read up from the bottom and just saw you mention democratic operative.  I wrote that assuming the congressman said it and I felt that was a bit of a jump.  Sounds like he was a democrat and I can understand the reasoning of calling someone that does a mass shooting a terrorist, so I guess he's not wrong, but as pfife said it was a gratuitous shot with the adjective he used.

I see no evidence that he was active in the Democratic Party. Just because he's anti-Trump or even anti-Republican does not make him a Democrat. There are other alternatives, after all. Bernie Sanders is one of those alternatives.

The gratuity of the shot is not against the the shooter—because who gives a fck about him—but against the Democratic Party and Democrats, since the congressman was suggesting that the shooter was acting on behalf of the party by calling him a "Democrat terrorist". He basically says the Democratic Party harbors or even employs terrorists. To which, by the way, I might reply, "Projection Junction, what's your function ..."

[1984Echoes]

What Bipartisan could look like in the House:

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/mccarthy-didnt-want-dems-save-215525254.html

[smr-nj]

2 hours ago, chasfh said:

I see no evidence that he was active in the Democratic Party. Just because he's anti-Trump or even anti-Republican does not make him a Democrat. There are other alternatives, after all. Bernie Sanders is one of those alternatives.

The gratuity of the shot is not against the the shooter—because who gives a fck about him—but against the Democratic Party and Democrats, since the congressman was suggesting that the shooter was acting on behalf of the party by calling him a "Democrat terrorist". He basically says the Democratic Party harbors or even employs terrorists. To which, by the way, I might reply, "Projection Junction, what's your function ..."

But, let’s be fair, and to ewsieg’s point, I have no doubt that a shooting of somebody from the other side would absolutely be identified using that person’s registered party also…. Even if he had no actual active participation in party activities.