Dr. Reich. I’m glad you put the word moderate in quotation marks when describing non-MAGA Republicans. We must never lose sight of the fact that ALL REPUBLICANS, including the now beatified Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, are anti-democratic extremists. If the United States is ever going to go forward along the path most of us who identify as progressive endorse, both our major political parties have to be rebuilt. But of the two, the most sweeping reconstruction must be on the Republican side. Republican authoritarianism is not new and for that reason the party needs to be completely demolished and rebuilt from the ground up. There should be no longer be any discussions in this country regarding who is an American our which regions of the nation are more authentically American in nature. The only thing that should separate Republicans from Democrats are questions of whether it is more appropriate to rely on government or the private sector to address what ever challenges we are facing at any given moment or when planning for the future. Both parties should be dedicated to the integrity of our institutions, to fairness and equity, to the belief that every American is a first class citizen, and to ensuring that we undertake public policies that benefit the greatest number and that move the nation closer realizing the principles upon which it is based.
All Republican House members are MAGA until proven otherwise. Burden of proof should be on them.
No Person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States…to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Who has the gumption to enforce this? Other than AOC, I'm not hearing House members talk about this, not even Schiff or Raskin (if they have, I'd love to see what they've said).
Yes! I can't wait till they get to the part about who among the Republican House and Senate engaged in the insurrection! Those traitors need to be ousted asap! And getting that two-thirds vote will never pass the Democratic Senate! Then the special elections could create the possibility of those Republicans being replaced by a non-MAGA Republican or better yet, a Democrat! Let God make a way when there is no way!
Ah, back to section 3 of the 14th amendment. I've been shouting it from the rooftops! When will it be enacted upon? Do we have to wait for the House to function to get it done?! Or can't the Senate, or the Justice Dept., act upon this? It is certainly valid. What is it going to take to begin to follow the Constitution?!
This conversation is like a conference of chemical engineers discussing the composition of smoke filling their room, as the building burns down around them.
Here's what you need to know and do right now, January 2nd:
1) If Kevin McCarthy gets 218 votes on the first ballot tomorrow, he becomes Speaker. If that happens, all the rest is nothing but smoke.
2) Therefore, to prevent that from happening, right this minute we need to persuade one or two moderate Republicans to vote for literally anyone else in the world on the first ballot, so a consensus candidate (whomever that might be) can emerge.
3) Therefore again, everyone who wants to prevent McCarthy from becoming Speaker needs to call as many potential Republican defectors as possible and implore them to vote for someone other than McCarthy.
A small group of us have been working on this for weeks, and we consider the Representatives listed below to be most open to standing up for the good of the country.
McCarthy is offering these sensible moderates absolutely nothing, completely taking their support for granted, while empowering those with the worst intentions and the loudest voices.
Your phone is right there by your side. Pick it up and call one or more, urge them to take a step toward civility and vote for someone other than McCarthy. You can make a difference. Do it now, tomorrow is too late.
Brian Fitzpatrick.... (202) 225-4276. Andrew Garbarino.... (202) 225-7896.
Ken Calvert.... (202) 225-1986. Mike Carey.... (202) 225-2015.
John Curtis.... (202) 225-7751. Mike Gallagher.... (202) 225-5665.
Ashley Hinson.... (202) 225-2911. Dave Joyce.... (202) 225-5731.
Nicole Maliotakis.... (202) 225-3371. Blake Moore.... (202) 225-0453. Dan Newhouse.... (202) 225-5816. Chris Stewart.... (202) 225-3031.
Michael Turner.... (202) 225-6465. Ann Wagner.... (202) 225-1621.
BTW I had to undergo FBI background checks every 5 years, sign loyalty oaths, to be employed as a government employee.
I assume every member of Congress has been vetted for a security clearance. IMHO anyone who can't pass should be investigated by House Ethics Committee.
Not my rules. The 14th Amendment. Look it up! There are sitting Republican Senators who aided & abetted the insurrection. In other words, they had a part in it, which is against the United States of America. They are therefore ineligible to serve.
Jim, that's the problem. The nation the two major parties in the US see is quite different. For Democrats for the most part, the nation is a diverse group of people from all over the world with many interests, different beliefs, and talents that can come together to do great things. One has decision-making powers over their own body, children must be protected but not from books, and global warming is real and we all need to work hard to stop it since it is humans who caused and are causing it. Republicans want a white nation (white defined by them). Everyone else who is here is inferior and they deserve only what the white folks are willing to give them. They can only vote if they support what the whites vote for. They believe they have the right to make decisions about other people's bodies, particularly women's. They choose to ignore global warming and if a business brings in money, who cares what damage it causes. Besides, those inferior people are the only ones who live near those "money-making" facilities.
In short, I do not see Republicans being willing to examine anything about their positions on anything. The only way to get them to even stop their nonsense at all is to vote them out of office or, when they have committed crimes against our nation, put them in the jails they were hoping to fill with Black and Brown people. Because Democrats in some places, like New York, couldn't get off their butts to vote, we have Republicans running the House. It seems it is Dems who have the best chance of reworking operations to include more people, get voter registration automatic in as many states as possible, then find ways to encourage people to vote EVERY election. As far as I can tell, Republicans are going to become more extreme as time goes on because it works.
I am in agreement with most of what you say, except singling out New York's non-voters. Living in California. I have no room to complain about other States voting records. I think we got a little over 50% of the registered voters out to vote, and we have universal, free mail in voting here. Not only do 4 out of 10 not get off their duffs to vote, they can't even take a half hour in a month's time to fill out and post their ballot. We even have free tracking of when our ballots were received and counted. We, who care, need to a lot more to see that at least 70% of eligible voters actually vote.
Fay, we in PA did a little better than 50%, but I think that was just because there was a Senate and Governor race here. People here really didn't want anti-abortion candidates for the most part and put some effort into keeping them out. I am really with you in stating our need to get people to value voting and getting out to vote or even completing mail-in ballots. I cannot see any excuse for not voting today. We have mail-in balloting in many states, often without excuse. I would like to see that everywhere. Then several of our more progressive states mail ballots to all citizens. It is criminal to me the number of people who never bother to just fill out the little dots and vote. That is beyond laziness. Waiting in long lines still happens in Black and Latinx neighborhoods which is something that must be changed. I figure that if upper middle-class voters don't have to wait in lines, working-class and poor voters shouldn't have to wait either. It means there are not enough voting places in the poorer neighborhoods which needs to be fixed. None of these problems should be keeping people from the polls if they choose to vote in person or from the mailbox if they choose to vote by mail. Oh yes, more drop boxes would be helpful too, and if there is only 1 drop off box for a county, it should be in the district with the most people who don't drive so they can get to the drop-off. A family member should be able to drop off all ballots for their family too. All the voter suppression laws passed are to keep people of color and some poor people from voting. Red state legislatures are OK with that and keeping Democrats from voting too. And, We the People allow it by continuing to vote for these voter suppressionists. When will we wake up and truly recognize that it is We the People who maintain our democracy and that it is time we all step up, get informed, then vote out those who care nothing for our democracy, only their own power?
Ruth, these are great points. May I also add that Democrats must do a better job of framing the stakes of every election, in every place, to spur turnout. To their credit, Republicans point out, in every race, what voting for them achieves for their base, for current and long term goals. Democrats seem to only rally their party to vote the year of the Presidency and then approach every other race with apathy. How much different would results be if Democrats always ran on the other party's hostility to bodily autonomy and separation of church and state? Results of elections over the years might have been different if Dem candidates always stressed that the majority names your sitting SCOTUS with lifelong terms, passes laws about bankruptcy, insurance coverage, worker protections, corporate liability, civil rights... The list is almost indeterminable.
Republicans seem to have mastered creating Boogeymen that likely don't exist to drive their voters in every election. Democrats need to name all of the Boogeymen that do exist, just waiting to jump up from beneath the bed with a Republican majority.
As a New Yorker I am grateful that you are calling out my state for laziness and indifference. 4 of the CDs were only marginally won by Rethuglicans and we almost lost the gubernatorial race as well. Santos is scheduled to be my representative tomorrow and I feel like I'm screaming in the wind. Rant over.
There's so much I don't understand about why the two Republicans who seem to have a lick of sense still voted with the radicals on so many critical issues.
Excellent and persuasive. Although when we deem “everyone a first class citizen” we have the right as first class citizens for asking that those same citizens give back to our country in a first class way. We could ask that all citizens “give back “ to the country they refer to as first class.
By giving back they( all) could adhere to the traffic laws( signals), red lights, parking designations, etc. that list can go on and on of course. But, as a simple act of genuine concern for our nation this is a simple and singular “give back”.
Then we can ask for a little bigger “give back” by the corporations that consider themselves “people”. They could start “training “ employees . This gives the hired help a great advantage in making themselves better prepared for “giving back”.It also gives the sense of genuine hope in making their lives capable of “giving back”.
Not only a curriculum that proves useful in aiming for truth and excellence, but in giving a sense of power to the individual.
Higher up the ladder: We could let those who believe they can “give back” by working for the rest of us as representatives of Government, know that “power” does not sell if it is disconnected from the idea of “giving back. “ They (those who want to work for our Nation) should also be given extensive and detailed training before having to take a test to prove they are ready to “Give Back.”
This concept works in families as children are guided and bound by certain conditions for becoming adult.
Thank you for making me think! That is “ giving back “ in the most loving way!
Jean, good thinking about giving back. After reading your comment, I started thinking about the mid-term campaigns. I don't remember a single Republican ad in my part of PA mentioning "giving back" to anyone, only about the rights they wanted to take away (abortion and probably birth control after that) and the rights they would force us to accept (everyone - actually white men - carrying a gun wherever they want). Neither of these matched what the people of PA want, but no Republican candidate cared. They whined about crime and inflation and put out a bunch of lying racist ads, and "joked" about what they wanted to do to people who didn't go along with their god-given "platform." They had no ideas related either to crime or inflation and did not mention helping or giving back to anyone. Democratic TV ads did say the candidates were hoping to work with and for the people of the state. Unfortunately a bunch of the whiny Republicans did win their contests, but fortunately, a larger bunch didn't win. Maybe another question candidates should be asked by voters and the media is about to whom and what cause they think we all should be giving of our resources and to which they, themselves give and should be giving. These and many others should be asked early in a campaign so the media can do some fact-checking. Clearly, we should have been doing a lot of that in this past election.
That would require a complete transformation from current ways of thinking. But we had that public mindset long ago. Both FDR & Kennedy helped instill that sense of civic responsibility. I'd love it if we could once again find a leader like that.
Jim writes, "We must never lose sight of the fact that ALL REPUBLICANS, including the now beatified Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, are anti-democratic extremists"
How is it that you propose we expand the base of the Democratic Party, and build a winning coalition in support of our preferred policies, if our game plan is to call everybody who doesn't agree with us on everything an ugly name?
Meaning no disrespect to Jim personally, but to all my fellow Democrats, this kind of crap needs to end. We need to stop using politics as a method of getting our fantasy superiority egos off. We need to stop always pointing the finger at somebody else, and spend more time looking in the mirror, addressing our own weaknesses, things we actually have power to fix.
We lost to the cartoon character Donald Dumpster in 2016. We lost. Our failure. Our FUBAR screw up. And we lost because we Dems have too long ignored, or even insulted, so many people who used to be part of our base.
If Liz Cheney is willing to go down in career flames in support of what is right, we should be standing on a chair applauding, not calling her names.
I think that Democrats should try to get a few Republicans to join them in voting for Liz Cheney for speaker, and if that fails, then I agree that David Joyce is a much better choice than embattled Kevin McCarthy.
I think having Cheney as speaker could do a lot for continuing oversight of Donald Trump. She could put together committees to look into his taxes and could also delve into his documents scandal, with public hearings on his wrongdoings. It would be really entertaining. I don't think that we could find the 5 or so Republicans to join the Democrats, though, but it is an idea that does give me joy.
Now that you’ve laid it out for me I could kind of get behind it. My issue with her is that she’s incredibly anti-Biden. That’s what’s holding me back.
Cheney opposes everything progressive. She is on video saying that waterboarding is not torture. She finally supports same sex marriage after a knock-down, drag out ordeal with her sister. She, nor none of her family, have had to shield themselves against a racist judicial system, nor have they every suffered hunger or eviction, or developed a life threatening disease because of proximity to toxic waste dumps. Nor have they had to drive a long distance to the polls or wait on hours-long lines to cast their ballots. Nor have they had to decide whether to pay for exorbitantly priced life-saving medications instead of buying food. As such, she has not a shred of empathy towards anyone who has.
I have never had any of those disadvantages, nor have most of my friends and associates, yet, we all have great empathy toward those who have. And we work for them, support them and donate to causes that help move that arc toward justice.
Dell, it is not essential for one to be disadvantaged to have empathy. I suspect lack of empathy happens when people's caring is dismissed and people come to see that empathy takes away from being good at a particular career or living in an "elite" place. Maybe some kids never develop it. Bullies in my experience as a teacher, rarely express empathy for anyone and bully culture rises up pretty early in life, by the 3rd grade playground. It would be great if when we adults see a lack of empathy on the part of public figures, we could call it out. Maybe it would be even better if we looked for empathy and caring on the part of the people running for public office and dismiss those who don't have it and are not willing to work on it. On the other hand, people can have empathy for people and causes that are not honest, fair, or of value. How do we deal with that??
Donna, you are on target with Cheyney's lack of experiences, but does that automatically mean a lack of empathy? I am not sure what experiences Kevin McCarthy has had, but I do know he has no empathy for anyone. He is pretty self-absorbed and willing to tap into the support of anyone, no matter what they stand for. I am now wondering what David Joyce's experiences have been. Can he relate to Americans at all levels, or is he into the rich and powerful like so many in Congress?
Ruth, I agree that there are privileged people who support progress. Thank goodness, many do not spend all their resources to pull up the ladder that they climbed so others cannot ascend. It is possible for someone to have never been deprived and to have empathy and energy to help those who need that ladder. Liz Cheney voted with trump some 90%+ of the time. I would never support anyone who has a record like that. From where I sit, Liz Cheney did her job. That's the bottom line. Who gets lionized for doing their job! She stood up against the violent overthrow of the United States government! I am glad that she did her job, but I certainly do not want to see anyone with those conservative values in leadership.
Tim, that concerns me too. I have no idea what Cheyney has against Biden, but that could be a problem if she turns into one who will stand against everything Biden proposes. That could be destructive, but we already know McCarthy will stand against everything Biden does or proposes, just because. This time, I hope we won't go with McCarthy, the devil we know.
In my estimation Liz Cheney’s problem with President Biden is that he was a two-time white Vice President with a black President. I’m saying this because the people in my family, all republicans, have told me they couldn’t vote for President Biden in the 2020 election for that very reason.
And Tim, I suspect they will claim they "don't have a racist bone in their body." People can tell themselves all kinds of things that may or may not be true, but if they decide to believe them, much of what they do will be impacted by them. Racism and misogyny are the most powerful belief structures impacting our society from its beginning related to slavery and segregation for racism, and from the time women realized we were not even being considered at all as though we only exist as attachments to males for misogyny. To not vote for Biden because of his association with a Black president is truly incomprehensible. It makes no sense except to people whose racism is so deep, it can't ever be removed. How does Cheyney's racism impact her decisions, probably pretty much. It seems to me from reports and listening to Republicans complain or try to decide who to vote for , they stand solidly with the racism and misogyny, as well as the homo/transphobia and xenophobia that are hallmarks of today's Republican party. That way, thinking is unnecessary. All one has to say when asked why they voted for a particular person is, "he/she is a Republican." That can say everything that needs to be said in 4 words. Just don't ask the person what Republicans have done for the ordinary American people in the past 40 years. They can't come up with an answer and it will make them angry, and that's OK, because it seems they like to be angry. At least they are feeling something.
Tim, I think you're right on target here. Dig down and it is racism. As a white, middle class person, my energy now is to support leaders, journalists, elected officials, grassroots organizers who are Black. They know what they need and I am listening and learning to act in line with their ideas and programs.
Kathy, the other thing that would be a point in her favor, she would not let the House go off on wasteful tangents to investigate everyone Republicans don't like, including the FBI (which they would find that Trump tried to corrupt the work of the FBI and might not be too pleased). Some governing might actually be done with her holding the gavel.
The best result for her & her future career in politics would be to become recognized as someone who could get things done by gaining bipartisanship on a number of issues, & she would be cognizant of this. Knowing that her attainment of this lofty, powerful position that gave her political career a 2nd chance was contingent on Democratic support, she's not likely to bite the hand that feeds her.
There may be some Republicans, who'd prefer Cheney to McCarthy, & perhaps enough of them could be induced to abstain if not vote for Cheney. We'd need at least 10 Republican abstentions or some combination of votes for Cheney (or Joyce or Kinzinger) & abstentions so that the majority of votes cast will be for our preference.
Jaime, maybe instead of thinking of "our" preference, we could frame this as electing the best person to serve the country as he/she leads the House of Representatives on behalf of all of us. It might get more support.
Ideally yes. But our range of choices is limited to those that can get elected. I'd love the Speaker to be Schiff or Porter or Grijalva or Tlaib or Lieu, but none of them could get elected if Republicans hold the majority. So among those who may have a chance to get a majority of votes cast, my choice would be Kinzinger followed by Cheney, because I think they are the best choices electable. We'd have to convince both enough Democrats & enough Republicans to pull it off.
Better yet, convince enough "moderate" (ack, cough, choke!) Repooplickins to sit out the vote, and Adam Schiff could be speaker... or Katie Porter, Ro Khanna, etc.
Greg, wouldn't that be amazing! Any of the people you named would be more fair than the Republicans named. The only thing they would not do is permit Republican shenanigans with impeaching people and other irrelevant Republican nonsense. It would be a unique experience and one Republican "moderates" could appreciate.
Maybe real moderates, but not likely what's left that we appropriately use quotes when we refer to them as "moderates" just because they're not quite as extreme as the rest of their caucus.
The Dark Horse: Representative Patrick McHenry of North Carolina -- the only Republican lawmaker whose name has been floated as a possible candidate for speaker who voted to certify the 2020 presidential election.
McHenry came to Congress in 2005 at the age of 29 as a conservative rabble-rouser, and was frequently seen yelling on the House floor or on cable news shows.
But in the years that followed, the silver-haired, bow tie-wearing Mr. McHenry underwent a metamorphosis. He became chief deputy whip to then-Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio, who later predicted that the North Carolina Republican would become speaker himself one day. He pointedly took a lower-profile, behind-the-scenes approach to the job. And he developed a reputation among other lawmakers for his braininess and interest in tax and financial policy.
“What changed for me was once I slowed down enough to respect the process and to respect the people that I served with in the institution,” Mr. McHenry once told a local newspaper. “I was able to get more done when I slowed down and had respect for others.”
Mr. McHenry, who has for years been an informal adviser to Mr. McCarthy, has previously tried to scuttle the notion that he was interested in any top leadership post, saying he would rather chair the Financial Services Committee. He once gave the Republican leader a silver bowl in a joking reference to a famous scene from the crime drama series “The Wire,” in which a former mayor tells an incoming one that the vaunted top job is akin to eating silver bowls of feces all day." NYT
Porter, alas, there is no rule that the Speaker must be a member of the House. Therfore, some of the extreme Trumpists were hoping to make him Speaker if they had enough votes (they don't). I can't think of a Republican in or out of office right now I would want as Speaker, the party fruit has fallen too far from the "liberty tree."
Kathy, wouldn't that be a kick to bring Cheyney back as Speaker. I could support that. However, except for her personal integrity, she holds positions that do not support where the American people are. That integrity thing is pretty powerful, though.
Liz Cheney is no longer a member of the House of Representatives, she lost in the Wyoming primaries and didn't even appear on the November ballot. The Speaker of the House has to at least be a member of the House.
Fay, as far as I understand it, the Speaker does not have to be a member of the House. They always have, but don't have to be. A bunch of Republicans last end of summer and fall were pushing the idea of making Trump speaker. First of all, he wouldn't be able to stand up to the job physically or intellectually. It turned out there was nothing legally to oppose such an election of someone not a House member. Heck, I can't even imagine a Republican beyond Cheyney and Kinzinger outside the House that Dems could support.
Specifically the Constitution ion Article I, Section 2, Paragraph 5, States: The House of Representatives shall chuse (choose) their Speaker and other officers; and shall have the sole power of impeachment. The rest of your response is a later interpretation of what someone "thinks" the framers of the Constitution meant. I disagree with their interpretation. It would make no sense to elect a Speaker of the House who could neither sit in the House (except in the Visitor's Gallery), nor vote on, nor write any legislature.
Janet, yes, that's the problem. When Republican individuals in power stop following the Party line" and decide to do what is right, the entire party will turn on them and even get worse people elected in their place. I have no empathy for Wyoming, ditching Cheyney for one of those women trying to make waves in the party and beyond, but who are only allowed to get so far because white men rule with impunity and the threat always stays over their head that they too can be sacrificed if they live their oath and do what is right, particularly when one of their superiors wants them doing/supporting something else. Greene is a perfect Republican female stooge. She wants her name smeared all over the place, so she will do and say the crazy things that will get Republican attention and courtship among them. She has nothing really to offer, but that is just the way they like it, uh huh! When one is pretty ignorant of most things but has her face stuck in the bouquet of the ridiculous, it will mean you are able to be manipulated because you don't want to lose the press and the attention that you thrive on. Greene is that person. Should she head a committee, the committee will basically ignore her and do what they are called to do despite her whining and insulting that most Dems and a few Republicans are already sick of. Greene and a few others are trying to be Trump-light, but female. She and her cronies forget about misogyny. If she gets too much recognition, she will feel the hand holding her down and working hard to shut her up.
I'm kinda looking forward to watching Kevin or whoever is speaker, trying to reign her in. She thumbed her nose at him b4. Both she & Boebart need a muzzle with consequences... at least on the floors of Congress. All we can hope for is the LEAST.
Janet, I suspect you are right, but what would they learn that we don't already know. The ladies are trying to be big fish in a small misogynist pond and in order to get recognized, their natural drive to be nuts is coming out. They don't realize they are being used while they think they are using the party. They haven't figured out that it is in no way mutual use. White men would never permit that. Whenever Ms. Boebert and Ms. Greene become less attractive or too shrill or no longer useful, they will be shut up no matter how they fight. It is the lot of all Republican women. Heck, Susan Collins was used by Brett Kavanaugh, lying that he would not vote to overturn precedent when it came to Roe v. Wade. Of course he was lying, but Collins was "forced" to believe him if she wanted donations for her reelection. Hey ladies, that's how it always works for Republican women!
Regarding the Jan. 3rd vote for House Speaker, I write to note that at subscriber Jerry Weiss’s urgings I have contacted, via phone and email, both outgoing and incoming Democratic leadership plus two Democratic members of the House’s bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus. After introducing myself and crediting Jerry for the text (which can be found in the Dec. 20th Comment Section), I wrote the following:
Dear ,
As someone anxiously watching and waiting while Freedom Caucus extremists are extracting concession after concession from Kevin McCarthy, as he desperately attempts to get enough votes to become speaker, I rightly fear that far-right extremists will be setting the agenda for the next two years. Hence, I write to prevail upon Democrats, under leadership’s auspices, to join with seemingly more moderate Republicans, who already have signaled a willingness to work with like-minded people across the aisle, to find a consensus Speaker, one though publicly unified with moderates in support of McCarthy for Speaker, has indicated concerns regarding concessions already extracted.
While some might contend that peeling off a half dozen potential moderate votes is good strategy, I would maintain it likely would be easier to get 40 votes than 5. I base this judgment on the premise that moderates by their very nature are, well, moderate and would be reluctant to act boldly. Thus, the best candidate would be one who comes with substantial support from a host of establishment colleagues.
I can’t emphasize enough how urgent the moment is. We need our Democratic representatives in the House to use their 213 votes in support of a moderate Republican for Speaker. Here, I would underscore that the very thing that makes a moderate Republican suitable for the Speakership is his or her respect for governance and a normally functioning, problem-solving legislature. And that is precisely what the MAGA extremists seek to subvert. Their agenda of investigations and recriminations is intended to disrupt normal order in Congress. Allowing them to hold the spotlight with a succession of ugly, hate-filled investigations through 2024 would be analogous to a slow-motion, non-violent version of January 6th.
Therefore, knowing that without some plan our Republic is in grave danger, I urge Democrats to give their votes to a mutually agreeable alternative, who, in return, will reject Kevin McCarthy’s bid for speaker and raise public awareness that a cross-party coalition is possible.
My sincere thanks to whoever receives this letter and a request that it promptly be passed to…
Barbara Jo, I like your letter and hope it reached Dems who are willing to take the time to read and share it. The one thing we all must never do is give up in the presence of the crazies who are working to do their best to bring this nation down in favor of the fascism they are imagining for themselves. We do know better.
Greg, To start, there is a distinction between the 10 Republicans who voted for Trump’s Second Impeachment, the 5 who voted in favor of requiring the IRS to conduct annual audits of the president’s tax returns, the 9 who voted to approve the $1.7 trillion omnibus bill, albeit problematic, to fund the government, the 39 who voted for the Respect For Marriage Act and the rest of the Republican Caucus that opposed all of the foregoing. I, further, would note the Republicans who cast these votes, by and large, also are members of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, the Main Street Caucus, and the Republican Governance Group, the latter being the organization Reich mentioned in reference to Joyce.
The point is that this cadre of Republicans, about 40 of whom held their seats, while publicly unified in urging House members to support Kevin McCarthy for Speaker, for the most part, are engaged with centrist Democrats in preliminary discussions about a possible contingency candidate if McCarthy, after multiple ballots, can’t get to 218 votes. Our job is to do whatever we can to convince as many of these Republicans as possible to vote for a mutually agreeable alternative on the first ballot.
I think all House members who voted for impeachment are gone. I hope a few of their kind have replaced them, but I don't know. But I fully agree with you.
Jamie, (1) Of the 10 who voted for Trump’s Second Impeachment only Dan Newhouse (Wash) and David Valadao (Calif) held their seats. (2) Of the 5 who voted in favor of requiring the IRS to conduct annual audits of the president’s tax returns, none held their seats. (3) Of the 9 who voted to approve the $1.7 trillion omnibus bill to fund the government, 2 held their seats—Brian Fitzpatrick (PA) and Steve Womack (AK). (4) Of the 39 who voted for the Respect For Marriage Act, I understand most of them will be back this week.
I provide this information because I now understand a past “moderate” vote is not a sufficiently determining factor. We need to change minds either by fostering respect for institutions and/or by provoking fear of electoral losses.
We haven't been effective at convincing republicans. We have been effective at getting recalcitrant Democratic voters to the polls, though. We need more progressives in office everywhere.
Donna, While I apologize for my delayed response, I wanted to take this opportunity to state that I agree with your assessment. Still, borrowing from an astute fellow subscriber, I wish to add, whether or not we accomplish a stated goal, if important enough, we have no choice, in my view, but to renew our resolve to be diligent, continuing to form alliances where we can, and working together to heal our fractured society and struggling democracy.
Thanks for all that information! If there was a name in favor of all those bills that's sticking around, I'd say go for that person, but once in a blue moon voting for a good bill isn't sufficient. I noticed that Joyce wasn't mentioned at all, so I'm moving away from him as a choice. Best to follow Daniel Solomon's suggestion, which I've been advocating repeatedly myself, which is to enforce the clause in the Constitution that states that anyone who breaks their oath of office & engages in unlawful activity against the state should only be seated if at least 2/3 of the members vote to seat them. There are at least a dozen members of the House that qualify for expulsion, which could, at least temporarily, give the Democrats back the majority in the House.
Jamie, Though I realize some time has passed since you posted this comment, I, nonetheless, wanted to use this opportunity to state, that while I agree with your assessment, I don’t imagine said standard will be realized in the foreseeable future. Hence, I see no choice but to persist, particularly in urgent situations, with the knowledge that a single seemingly insignificant effort can produce powerful results.
On another matter, I would note, having done some research, that David Joyce’s name has appeared on several lists of Republicans who are receptive to working across the aisle.
Way to think outside the box! If McCarthy does win the job, it won't be for long. The Drama Queen Emeritus, a/k/a the Orange Blowhard, who is so addicted to provoking chaos, will wave his tiny finger to depose him soon just to show off his power.
Exactly. What would serve Trump's interests better, in running again for the nomination, than demonstrating his power by toppling the Speaker of the House? Classic Trump move. All of this is a "Made for Stefanik" power play, either as Speaker or VP candidate.
"I have great comfort from this fellow: methinks he hath no drowning mark upon him; his complexion is perfect gallows. Stand fast, good Fate, to his hanging: make the rope of his destiny our cable, for our own doth little advantage. If he be not born to be hanged, our case is miserable."
It was when she started trying to match MAGA Jordan, Meadows, and Radcliffe during the Russia hearings that I first became aware of her. I knew immediately that she was “going places”. Her histrionics were 100% fake but once she dipped her toe into the Q rabbit holes I knew who she was. We do seem to be on the same page, I think.
Fun fact. Elise is married to Matthew Manda. Wikipedia: "As of 2022, Manda works as the manager of public affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade association for firearms manufacturers." She blamed Pelosi for the January 6th Capitol riot. Pretty good for a Harvard girl, huh?
Stefanik. Watch her at any press interaction. She’s standing right beside McCarthy. I kind of see her left hip swinging over and bumping him away from the microphone. She’s smart and she’s got bigger plans for herself. It also makes her dangerous
She shoved Liz Cheney right out of the House and took her place. Nasty, nasty. She and DeSantis would make a great team driving the country over the cliff, exploding into a million pieces and going up in flames.
I hear your concern but the present Republican membership is locked in a party over country philosophy. They stand like duck pins waiting to be bowled over by a barrage of blind Trumpish lies still circulating through out our country. Robert, you have a plan which is more than I can say for the McCarthy camp. The Freedom Caucus seems to be holding poor Kevin in a rather precarious position. Without relenting to their demands this right wing group has Mr. McCarthy right where they want him, which isn't all together a bad thing knowing the make up of the man's political allegiance. Your background and experience carries enough weight to sway opinions looking for fundamental guidance. The Republican party with its control over the House will act like the Hoover Damn holding back the waters of a gentle woodland stream, President Biden's next two years are going to be a challenge at best. I stand with your thoughts about Joyce over McCarthy, looking at the alternative it makes good sense.
Agree to wear what? Those added personal affects have been a part of his normal attire ever since he aligned himself with Trump. As for being a clown, he seems to have the shoes for it.
Dichotomy sounds like a disorder gamblers get from participating in a game of craps, throw in the practice of standing by the ropes and letting the other guy wear himself out through the repeated harmless punching of his opponent leaves me at a loss as to what your point is.
Absolutely, & by doing so, the Republicans would not have a majority [at least until those expelled members are replaced (by whom, I would not know)]. But Democrats never play hardball, even when supported by the Constitution.
Unfortunately, ithis is not the time to discuss what would be nice. We must discuss what is possible given the present reality and what is at stake. Robert's suggestion seems to me to have the best chance of success. I hope the Democrats and nonMAGA Republicans go along with it.
Whatever strategy that can get virtually 100% Democratic support & cooperation by enough Republicans is what should happen. Whether that candidate is Joyce, Cheney, Kinzinger or somebody else, I can't be sure.
Hemlock or Arsenic. These people are despicable. And we are an international laughing stock for this mess that is the Republican Party. They waste the public's time and money with these soap operas. I like the way they just did it in Brazil. The outgoing president, a crony of Trump's who burned down the Amazon in the name of selfishness refused to present the presidential sash in the traditional ceremony to incoming president Lula. And so, a 33 year old garbage collector named Aline Sousa, representing the Brazilian people, put the presidential sash on Lula. Now here is what is going to happen to the Republican Party. The investors in them - their donors - are about tired of their foolishness. They are a bad investment. Adios, azzles. We don't need you. Biden is generating plenty of new business, and foreign capital is fleeing China, Russia, Europe, Africa to the stablest game in the world, the US stock market.
Notice where the Brazilian loser went..... to Florida of course. Cozying up to DeSantis. Why do we let such slimy “immigrants “in . I am shocked at DeSantis!!!!! Ha ha. This is where sarcasm really helps just before one loses his/her mind by shear exhaustion.
Professor Reich, what are you doing to promote this idea to House Dems directly, besides writing it in this newsletter? You have access….I hope you are using it!!
Good question, Nancy. I would note, based on Reich’s Saturday (Nov. 17th) Coffee Klatch, subscriber Jerry Weiss, in the Dec. 20th Comment Section, posted several astute appeals, urging us to contact pertinent parties. About 2 hours ago, I posted the letter on this platform I had sent to outgoing and incoming Democratic leadership plus 2 Democratic members of the House bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus.
Admittedly, I don’t expect word from me to get the kind of attention a contact from Reich would get. Still, I believe if enough of us call and write (I did both), we could have an impact.
Rebert, you gave Joyce the kiss of death. If he runs, next time he will be primariaried.
Members of the Joyce group include our three Batistiano members from Baghdad By the Sea: Mario Díaz-Balart, Carlos A. Giménez, and María Elvira Salazar, all who support the golpe (coup). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Governance_Group
Do ANY Republican House members reject the big lie? Will ANY refuse to sit with insurrectionists?
While I understand the desire to let the Repubs stew, I must disagree. First of all, Putting Joyce in is another shot at the MAGA Trumpinistas. And secondly, this offers a route to getting a few things done over the next two years. Not everything Biden might want - there is no nirvana - but at least there would be some semblance of government functioning, which in and of itself is a remarkable and possibly wonderful thing to watch.
Better WE should concentrate on refusing to seat insurrectionists and serial liars.
No Person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States…to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Object! Take a vote on eligibility on every member. Make a record.
I just figured that Trump has the MAGA GOP in his hand, they are doing his will and proving that Trump owns the House GOP. In exchange for letting the MAGAs vote for McCarthy he wants their endorsement of him for 2024 and etc. He is proving that he owns the House GOP.
Yes. The true blue (actually red of course) MAGA types are in line against McCarthy. There are enough of them that the the Republican caucus is in a collective stew. Democrats breaking that with a few votes for a moderate can refute Trump and the MAGA crowd and provide for a functioning congress -- thus disproving and possibly breaking Trump's "ownership" of the House. Sort of like poisoning a malignant tumor with radiation.
Does it really matter who is speaker, or who controls the Congress? Here's the case...
ASSERTION: There is no credible argument which can support the idea that humanity can maintain arsenals of thousands of nuclear weapons and those weapons will never be used. To make such an assumption is to completely ignore human history and human psychology, that is, to live in a very dangerous fantasy.
If you can accept that claim, then the next step should be to see which political party is doing the most to protect the nation from the ultimate calamity. Those citizens who are capable of being somewhat objective, somewhat honest, and at least trying to escape their preferred tribal bubble, should see this...
When it comes to saving America from an inevitable nuclear holocaust, BOTH parties are equally worthless. Completely worthless. There's not only no leadership, neither party really has much to say on the matter. This is true even in presidential campaigns when we are selecting a single human being to have sole authority over America's nuclear arsenal.
When it comes to all kinds of smaller issues there is a meaningful difference between the parties which is why I've been a Democrat longer than many of you have been alive. But when it comes to the survival of the nation, both parties are basically brain dead asleep at the wheel.
Here's who should be Speaker of the House. Anybody, literally anybody, who promises to speak about nothing but nuclear weapons for the duration of their term. A term which will be short, I agree. But even a few days of being an actual leader beats no days at all.
Guys and gals, political blogs all over the net talk about almost nothing beyond why "we are good and they are bad". I know this is fun, but I'm sorry, we just can't afford this hobby.
Nuclear annihilation is 1 of the 2 major existential threats mankind faces, the other being biospheric collapse due to anthropogenic climate chaos, ecosystem disintegration, environmental destruction, mass extinction, etc., & government officials have done next to nothing positive on either count.
Great points Jaime, thanks for joining in. Yes, you're right, every threat you mention is very important too.
We should look at existential threats, those factors capable of bringing down the entire system, in a holistic manner. When it comes to existential threats, it's not good enough to win on just this or that issue, we have to win on them all.
You're a musician in Oregon? You lucky dog! I've been a wannabe musician for years (getting worse all the time) and Oregon has always been my favorite fantasy destination. I hitchhiked out there from Florida in the 70s, but didn't have it together enough at the time to stay.
Thanks much for the likes folks. Still hoping for engagement too. If what I've claimed is generally true, why should we care who is Speaker Of The House? Whatever they accomplish will be swept away in a coming tsunami of chaos, right? And whoever the next Speaker might be, it's not likely they're going to do much to prevent that, yes?
And so dear friends and my fellow Americans upon this basis I hereby nominate Foghorn Leghorn as the next Speaker, because he's at least fun to look at!
I don't have a vote - not from Melbourne, Australia. If I did, it would be for Joyce. It's a step back to sanity. The world needs America to move back to where it was BT - before Trump.
Dr. Reich, do not get distracted! Focus should be be on "Why has the DOJ not yet acted to arrest T45?" It would resolve many issues that you try to address and would bring down the GOP (#GravediggersOfDemocracy) - not just MAGA - house of cards.
Dr. Reich. I’m glad you put the word moderate in quotation marks when describing non-MAGA Republicans. We must never lose sight of the fact that ALL REPUBLICANS, including the now beatified Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, are anti-democratic extremists. If the United States is ever going to go forward along the path most of us who identify as progressive endorse, both our major political parties have to be rebuilt. But of the two, the most sweeping reconstruction must be on the Republican side. Republican authoritarianism is not new and for that reason the party needs to be completely demolished and rebuilt from the ground up. There should be no longer be any discussions in this country regarding who is an American our which regions of the nation are more authentically American in nature. The only thing that should separate Republicans from Democrats are questions of whether it is more appropriate to rely on government or the private sector to address what ever challenges we are facing at any given moment or when planning for the future. Both parties should be dedicated to the integrity of our institutions, to fairness and equity, to the belief that every American is a first class citizen, and to ensuring that we undertake public policies that benefit the greatest number and that move the nation closer realizing the principles upon which it is based.
All Republican House members are MAGA until proven otherwise. Burden of proof should be on them.
No Person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States…to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
https://www.pogo.org/report/2022/11/the-constitutions-disqualification-clause-can-be-enforced-today#:~:text=The%20disqualification%20clause%20of%20the,Constitution%20of%20the%20United%20States.
Who has the gumption to enforce this? Other than AOC, I'm not hearing House members talk about this, not even Schiff or Raskin (if they have, I'd love to see what they've said).
Maybe Jack Smith could have a look at this... It will come in handy after he's investigated them ALL!
Make It So, KARMA.
Not yet!
Repeat often please.
Yes! I can't wait till they get to the part about who among the Republican House and Senate engaged in the insurrection! Those traitors need to be ousted asap! And getting that two-thirds vote will never pass the Democratic Senate! Then the special elections could create the possibility of those Republicans being replaced by a non-MAGA Republican or better yet, a Democrat! Let God make a way when there is no way!
What about the Supreme Court we have a sitting judge who’s wife was at the J/6 rally and was involved
When is someone going to get yo that? I know one thing at a time but geeze 🤬
Ah, back to section 3 of the 14th amendment. I've been shouting it from the rooftops! When will it be enacted upon? Do we have to wait for the House to function to get it done?! Or can't the Senate, or the Justice Dept., act upon this? It is certainly valid. What is it going to take to begin to follow the Constitution?!
I didn't make the rules. In the Constitution.
https://www.pogo.org/report/2022/11/the-constitutions-disqualification-clause-can-be-enforced-today#:~:text=The%20disqualification%20clause%20of%20the,Constitution%20of%20the%20United%20States.
This conversation is like a conference of chemical engineers discussing the composition of smoke filling their room, as the building burns down around them.
Here's what you need to know and do right now, January 2nd:
1) If Kevin McCarthy gets 218 votes on the first ballot tomorrow, he becomes Speaker. If that happens, all the rest is nothing but smoke.
2) Therefore, to prevent that from happening, right this minute we need to persuade one or two moderate Republicans to vote for literally anyone else in the world on the first ballot, so a consensus candidate (whomever that might be) can emerge.
3) Therefore again, everyone who wants to prevent McCarthy from becoming Speaker needs to call as many potential Republican defectors as possible and implore them to vote for someone other than McCarthy.
A small group of us have been working on this for weeks, and we consider the Representatives listed below to be most open to standing up for the good of the country.
McCarthy is offering these sensible moderates absolutely nothing, completely taking their support for granted, while empowering those with the worst intentions and the loudest voices.
Your phone is right there by your side. Pick it up and call one or more, urge them to take a step toward civility and vote for someone other than McCarthy. You can make a difference. Do it now, tomorrow is too late.
Brian Fitzpatrick.... (202) 225-4276. Andrew Garbarino.... (202) 225-7896.
Ken Calvert.... (202) 225-1986. Mike Carey.... (202) 225-2015.
John Curtis.... (202) 225-7751. Mike Gallagher.... (202) 225-5665.
Ashley Hinson.... (202) 225-2911. Dave Joyce.... (202) 225-5731.
Nicole Maliotakis.... (202) 225-3371. Blake Moore.... (202) 225-0453. Dan Newhouse.... (202) 225-5816. Chris Stewart.... (202) 225-3031.
Michael Turner.... (202) 225-6465. Ann Wagner.... (202) 225-1621.
Mike Waltz.... (202) 225-2706.
.
They have to take take the oath of office to be seated. They can lie - subject to penalty of perjury.
Have a higher duty than ordinary citizens.
BTW I had to undergo FBI background checks every 5 years, sign loyalty oaths, to be employed as a government employee.
I assume every member of Congress has been vetted for a security clearance. IMHO anyone who can't pass should be investigated by House Ethics Committee.
Not my rules. The 14th Amendment. Look it up! There are sitting Republican Senators who aided & abetted the insurrection. In other words, they had a part in it, which is against the United States of America. They are therefore ineligible to serve.
Jim, that's the problem. The nation the two major parties in the US see is quite different. For Democrats for the most part, the nation is a diverse group of people from all over the world with many interests, different beliefs, and talents that can come together to do great things. One has decision-making powers over their own body, children must be protected but not from books, and global warming is real and we all need to work hard to stop it since it is humans who caused and are causing it. Republicans want a white nation (white defined by them). Everyone else who is here is inferior and they deserve only what the white folks are willing to give them. They can only vote if they support what the whites vote for. They believe they have the right to make decisions about other people's bodies, particularly women's. They choose to ignore global warming and if a business brings in money, who cares what damage it causes. Besides, those inferior people are the only ones who live near those "money-making" facilities.
In short, I do not see Republicans being willing to examine anything about their positions on anything. The only way to get them to even stop their nonsense at all is to vote them out of office or, when they have committed crimes against our nation, put them in the jails they were hoping to fill with Black and Brown people. Because Democrats in some places, like New York, couldn't get off their butts to vote, we have Republicans running the House. It seems it is Dems who have the best chance of reworking operations to include more people, get voter registration automatic in as many states as possible, then find ways to encourage people to vote EVERY election. As far as I can tell, Republicans are going to become more extreme as time goes on because it works.
I am in agreement with most of what you say, except singling out New York's non-voters. Living in California. I have no room to complain about other States voting records. I think we got a little over 50% of the registered voters out to vote, and we have universal, free mail in voting here. Not only do 4 out of 10 not get off their duffs to vote, they can't even take a half hour in a month's time to fill out and post their ballot. We even have free tracking of when our ballots were received and counted. We, who care, need to a lot more to see that at least 70% of eligible voters actually vote.
Fay, we in PA did a little better than 50%, but I think that was just because there was a Senate and Governor race here. People here really didn't want anti-abortion candidates for the most part and put some effort into keeping them out. I am really with you in stating our need to get people to value voting and getting out to vote or even completing mail-in ballots. I cannot see any excuse for not voting today. We have mail-in balloting in many states, often without excuse. I would like to see that everywhere. Then several of our more progressive states mail ballots to all citizens. It is criminal to me the number of people who never bother to just fill out the little dots and vote. That is beyond laziness. Waiting in long lines still happens in Black and Latinx neighborhoods which is something that must be changed. I figure that if upper middle-class voters don't have to wait in lines, working-class and poor voters shouldn't have to wait either. It means there are not enough voting places in the poorer neighborhoods which needs to be fixed. None of these problems should be keeping people from the polls if they choose to vote in person or from the mailbox if they choose to vote by mail. Oh yes, more drop boxes would be helpful too, and if there is only 1 drop off box for a county, it should be in the district with the most people who don't drive so they can get to the drop-off. A family member should be able to drop off all ballots for their family too. All the voter suppression laws passed are to keep people of color and some poor people from voting. Red state legislatures are OK with that and keeping Democrats from voting too. And, We the People allow it by continuing to vote for these voter suppressionists. When will we wake up and truly recognize that it is We the People who maintain our democracy and that it is time we all step up, get informed, then vote out those who care nothing for our democracy, only their own power?
Ruth, these are great points. May I also add that Democrats must do a better job of framing the stakes of every election, in every place, to spur turnout. To their credit, Republicans point out, in every race, what voting for them achieves for their base, for current and long term goals. Democrats seem to only rally their party to vote the year of the Presidency and then approach every other race with apathy. How much different would results be if Democrats always ran on the other party's hostility to bodily autonomy and separation of church and state? Results of elections over the years might have been different if Dem candidates always stressed that the majority names your sitting SCOTUS with lifelong terms, passes laws about bankruptcy, insurance coverage, worker protections, corporate liability, civil rights... The list is almost indeterminable.
Republicans seem to have mastered creating Boogeymen that likely don't exist to drive their voters in every election. Democrats need to name all of the Boogeymen that do exist, just waiting to jump up from beneath the bed with a Republican majority.
Fay and Ruth
We have so much work to do!
As a New Yorker I am grateful that you are calling out my state for laziness and indifference. 4 of the CDs were only marginally won by Rethuglicans and we almost lost the gubernatorial race as well. Santos is scheduled to be my representative tomorrow and I feel like I'm screaming in the wind. Rant over.
Kinzinger is neither antidemocratic nor extremist.
Thank you.
There's so much I don't understand about why the two Republicans who seem to have a lick of sense still voted with the radicals on so many critical issues.
The election was not stolen, the voting system is not broken.
Dear Jim,
Excellent and persuasive. Although when we deem “everyone a first class citizen” we have the right as first class citizens for asking that those same citizens give back to our country in a first class way. We could ask that all citizens “give back “ to the country they refer to as first class.
By giving back they( all) could adhere to the traffic laws( signals), red lights, parking designations, etc. that list can go on and on of course. But, as a simple act of genuine concern for our nation this is a simple and singular “give back”.
Then we can ask for a little bigger “give back” by the corporations that consider themselves “people”. They could start “training “ employees . This gives the hired help a great advantage in making themselves better prepared for “giving back”.It also gives the sense of genuine hope in making their lives capable of “giving back”.
Not only a curriculum that proves useful in aiming for truth and excellence, but in giving a sense of power to the individual.
Higher up the ladder: We could let those who believe they can “give back” by working for the rest of us as representatives of Government, know that “power” does not sell if it is disconnected from the idea of “giving back. “ They (those who want to work for our Nation) should also be given extensive and detailed training before having to take a test to prove they are ready to “Give Back.”
This concept works in families as children are guided and bound by certain conditions for becoming adult.
Thank you for making me think! That is “ giving back “ in the most loving way!
Jean, good thinking about giving back. After reading your comment, I started thinking about the mid-term campaigns. I don't remember a single Republican ad in my part of PA mentioning "giving back" to anyone, only about the rights they wanted to take away (abortion and probably birth control after that) and the rights they would force us to accept (everyone - actually white men - carrying a gun wherever they want). Neither of these matched what the people of PA want, but no Republican candidate cared. They whined about crime and inflation and put out a bunch of lying racist ads, and "joked" about what they wanted to do to people who didn't go along with their god-given "platform." They had no ideas related either to crime or inflation and did not mention helping or giving back to anyone. Democratic TV ads did say the candidates were hoping to work with and for the people of the state. Unfortunately a bunch of the whiny Republicans did win their contests, but fortunately, a larger bunch didn't win. Maybe another question candidates should be asked by voters and the media is about to whom and what cause they think we all should be giving of our resources and to which they, themselves give and should be giving. These and many others should be asked early in a campaign so the media can do some fact-checking. Clearly, we should have been doing a lot of that in this past election.
That would require a complete transformation from current ways of thinking. But we had that public mindset long ago. Both FDR & Kennedy helped instill that sense of civic responsibility. I'd love it if we could once again find a leader like that.
Cheney and Kinzinger may be Red but they’re far from anti-democratic MAGA maniacs.
Jim writes, "We must never lose sight of the fact that ALL REPUBLICANS, including the now beatified Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, are anti-democratic extremists"
How is it that you propose we expand the base of the Democratic Party, and build a winning coalition in support of our preferred policies, if our game plan is to call everybody who doesn't agree with us on everything an ugly name?
Meaning no disrespect to Jim personally, but to all my fellow Democrats, this kind of crap needs to end. We need to stop using politics as a method of getting our fantasy superiority egos off. We need to stop always pointing the finger at somebody else, and spend more time looking in the mirror, addressing our own weaknesses, things we actually have power to fix.
We lost to the cartoon character Donald Dumpster in 2016. We lost. Our failure. Our FUBAR screw up. And we lost because we Dems have too long ignored, or even insulted, so many people who used to be part of our base.
If Liz Cheney is willing to go down in career flames in support of what is right, we should be standing on a chair applauding, not calling her names.
Thank you for expressing this so well.
I think that Democrats should try to get a few Republicans to join them in voting for Liz Cheney for speaker, and if that fails, then I agree that David Joyce is a much better choice than embattled Kevin McCarthy.
I couldn’t support Cheney as speaker. Yes, she’s on the side of the Constitution but, she will always be her father’s daughter. I just can’t.
I think having Cheney as speaker could do a lot for continuing oversight of Donald Trump. She could put together committees to look into his taxes and could also delve into his documents scandal, with public hearings on his wrongdoings. It would be really entertaining. I don't think that we could find the 5 or so Republicans to join the Democrats, though, but it is an idea that does give me joy.
Now that you’ve laid it out for me I could kind of get behind it. My issue with her is that she’s incredibly anti-Biden. That’s what’s holding me back.
Cheney opposes everything progressive. She is on video saying that waterboarding is not torture. She finally supports same sex marriage after a knock-down, drag out ordeal with her sister. She, nor none of her family, have had to shield themselves against a racist judicial system, nor have they every suffered hunger or eviction, or developed a life threatening disease because of proximity to toxic waste dumps. Nor have they had to drive a long distance to the polls or wait on hours-long lines to cast their ballots. Nor have they had to decide whether to pay for exorbitantly priced life-saving medications instead of buying food. As such, she has not a shred of empathy towards anyone who has.
I have never had any of those disadvantages, nor have most of my friends and associates, yet, we all have great empathy toward those who have. And we work for them, support them and donate to causes that help move that arc toward justice.
Dell, it is not essential for one to be disadvantaged to have empathy. I suspect lack of empathy happens when people's caring is dismissed and people come to see that empathy takes away from being good at a particular career or living in an "elite" place. Maybe some kids never develop it. Bullies in my experience as a teacher, rarely express empathy for anyone and bully culture rises up pretty early in life, by the 3rd grade playground. It would be great if when we adults see a lack of empathy on the part of public figures, we could call it out. Maybe it would be even better if we looked for empathy and caring on the part of the people running for public office and dismiss those who don't have it and are not willing to work on it. On the other hand, people can have empathy for people and causes that are not honest, fair, or of value. How do we deal with that??
Yes, Dell, you say it very positively. When something happened that did hurt me, I did not then go out and vote for fascists.
Thank you for expressing my concerns in a way that I was unable to.
Let them tie their own shoelaces. Play hardball. Object to everything.
Donna, you are on target with Cheyney's lack of experiences, but does that automatically mean a lack of empathy? I am not sure what experiences Kevin McCarthy has had, but I do know he has no empathy for anyone. He is pretty self-absorbed and willing to tap into the support of anyone, no matter what they stand for. I am now wondering what David Joyce's experiences have been. Can he relate to Americans at all levels, or is he into the rich and powerful like so many in Congress?
Ruth, I agree that there are privileged people who support progress. Thank goodness, many do not spend all their resources to pull up the ladder that they climbed so others cannot ascend. It is possible for someone to have never been deprived and to have empathy and energy to help those who need that ladder. Liz Cheney voted with trump some 90%+ of the time. I would never support anyone who has a record like that. From where I sit, Liz Cheney did her job. That's the bottom line. Who gets lionized for doing their job! She stood up against the violent overthrow of the United States government! I am glad that she did her job, but I certainly do not want to see anyone with those conservative values in leadership.
Water boarding and daddy’s shenanigans might go together.
Absolutely. The acorn doesn't fall far from the tree.
Tim, that concerns me too. I have no idea what Cheyney has against Biden, but that could be a problem if she turns into one who will stand against everything Biden proposes. That could be destructive, but we already know McCarthy will stand against everything Biden does or proposes, just because. This time, I hope we won't go with McCarthy, the devil we know.
In my estimation Liz Cheney’s problem with President Biden is that he was a two-time white Vice President with a black President. I’m saying this because the people in my family, all republicans, have told me they couldn’t vote for President Biden in the 2020 election for that very reason.
And Tim, I suspect they will claim they "don't have a racist bone in their body." People can tell themselves all kinds of things that may or may not be true, but if they decide to believe them, much of what they do will be impacted by them. Racism and misogyny are the most powerful belief structures impacting our society from its beginning related to slavery and segregation for racism, and from the time women realized we were not even being considered at all as though we only exist as attachments to males for misogyny. To not vote for Biden because of his association with a Black president is truly incomprehensible. It makes no sense except to people whose racism is so deep, it can't ever be removed. How does Cheyney's racism impact her decisions, probably pretty much. It seems to me from reports and listening to Republicans complain or try to decide who to vote for , they stand solidly with the racism and misogyny, as well as the homo/transphobia and xenophobia that are hallmarks of today's Republican party. That way, thinking is unnecessary. All one has to say when asked why they voted for a particular person is, "he/she is a Republican." That can say everything that needs to be said in 4 words. Just don't ask the person what Republicans have done for the ordinary American people in the past 40 years. They can't come up with an answer and it will make them angry, and that's OK, because it seems they like to be angry. At least they are feeling something.
Tim, I think you're right on target here. Dig down and it is racism. As a white, middle class person, my energy now is to support leaders, journalists, elected officials, grassroots organizers who are Black. They know what they need and I am listening and learning to act in line with their ideas and programs.
I agree with that, but I don't think she would be any worse than Kevin McCarthy on that count.
Kathy, the other thing that would be a point in her favor, she would not let the House go off on wasteful tangents to investigate everyone Republicans don't like, including the FBI (which they would find that Trump tried to corrupt the work of the FBI and might not be too pleased). Some governing might actually be done with her holding the gavel.
The best result for her & her future career in politics would be to become recognized as someone who could get things done by gaining bipartisanship on a number of issues, & she would be cognizant of this. Knowing that her attainment of this lofty, powerful position that gave her political career a 2nd chance was contingent on Democratic support, she's not likely to bite the hand that feeds her.
There may be some Republicans, who'd prefer Cheney to McCarthy, & perhaps enough of them could be induced to abstain if not vote for Cheney. We'd need at least 10 Republican abstentions or some combination of votes for Cheney (or Joyce or Kinzinger) & abstentions so that the majority of votes cast will be for our preference.
Jaime, maybe instead of thinking of "our" preference, we could frame this as electing the best person to serve the country as he/she leads the House of Representatives on behalf of all of us. It might get more support.
Ideally yes. But our range of choices is limited to those that can get elected. I'd love the Speaker to be Schiff or Porter or Grijalva or Tlaib or Lieu, but none of them could get elected if Republicans hold the majority. So among those who may have a chance to get a majority of votes cast, my choice would be Kinzinger followed by Cheney, because I think they are the best choices electable. We'd have to convince both enough Democrats & enough Republicans to pull it off.
Maybe she could take Qevin hunting.
Hilarious statement! 😂
🤣🤣🤣
How about Kinzinger? He is more moderate, & seems to be acceptable to more House members, although I could be wrong on that.
And one of her public donors is the remaining Koch brother. She sent a message in that photo op. NO to Cheney
Better yet, convince enough "moderate" (ack, cough, choke!) Repooplickins to sit out the vote, and Adam Schiff could be speaker... or Katie Porter, Ro Khanna, etc.
Yeah, that could happen.
Greg, wouldn't that be amazing! Any of the people you named would be more fair than the Republicans named. The only thing they would not do is permit Republican shenanigans with impeaching people and other irrelevant Republican nonsense. It would be a unique experience and one Republican "moderates" could appreciate.
Maybe real moderates, but not likely what's left that we appropriately use quotes when we refer to them as "moderates" just because they're not quite as extreme as the rest of their caucus.
The Dark Horse: Representative Patrick McHenry of North Carolina -- the only Republican lawmaker whose name has been floated as a possible candidate for speaker who voted to certify the 2020 presidential election.
McHenry came to Congress in 2005 at the age of 29 as a conservative rabble-rouser, and was frequently seen yelling on the House floor or on cable news shows.
But in the years that followed, the silver-haired, bow tie-wearing Mr. McHenry underwent a metamorphosis. He became chief deputy whip to then-Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio, who later predicted that the North Carolina Republican would become speaker himself one day. He pointedly took a lower-profile, behind-the-scenes approach to the job. And he developed a reputation among other lawmakers for his braininess and interest in tax and financial policy.
“What changed for me was once I slowed down enough to respect the process and to respect the people that I served with in the institution,” Mr. McHenry once told a local newspaper. “I was able to get more done when I slowed down and had respect for others.”
Mr. McHenry, who has for years been an informal adviser to Mr. McCarthy, has previously tried to scuttle the notion that he was interested in any top leadership post, saying he would rather chair the Financial Services Committee. He once gave the Republican leader a silver bowl in a joking reference to a famous scene from the crime drama series “The Wire,” in which a former mayor tells an incoming one that the vaunted top job is akin to eating silver bowls of feces all day." NYT
Someone I didn't know about. Good to know it is possible to moderate after some time in that environment.
The leaders are McCarthy and Andy Biggs -- who begged Trump for a pardon. So did Gym Jordan, who opposed McCarthy 4 years ago.
They won't run. Committed to McCarthy.
All fear Trump.
Know nothing about him
Don't, please, waste your imagination on this Liz Cheney gambit. It will happen when you sprout wings and fly.
In 2022 she voted in favor of some very cruel hunting regulations in Wyoming.
And she voted with trump some 90%+ of the time. Is that someone you want arranging priorities in the House!!!
But doesn't the Speaker have to be an elected member of the House? If so, that leaves out Cheney.
Apparently not. The Constitution does not require that the Speaker be an incumbent member of the House, interestingly.
Porter, alas, there is no rule that the Speaker must be a member of the House. Therfore, some of the extreme Trumpists were hoping to make him Speaker if they had enough votes (they don't). I can't think of a Republican in or out of office right now I would want as Speaker, the party fruit has fallen too far from the "liberty tree."
True! Darn!!
No. The speaker is not required to have been elected to office by a citizenry. They’re elected only by The House of Representatives.
Kathy, wouldn't that be a kick to bring Cheyney back as Speaker. I could support that. However, except for her personal integrity, she holds positions that do not support where the American people are. That integrity thing is pretty powerful, though.
As the chance of this occurring is the same as someone sprouting wings, why waste time on it?
Liz Cheney is no longer a member of the House of Representatives, she lost in the Wyoming primaries and didn't even appear on the November ballot. The Speaker of the House has to at least be a member of the House.
Fay, as far as I understand it, the Speaker does not have to be a member of the House. They always have, but don't have to be. A bunch of Republicans last end of summer and fall were pushing the idea of making Trump speaker. First of all, he wouldn't be able to stand up to the job physically or intellectually. It turned out there was nothing legally to oppose such an election of someone not a House member. Heck, I can't even imagine a Republican beyond Cheyney and Kinzinger outside the House that Dems could support.
Specifically the Constitution ion Article I, Section 2, Paragraph 5, States: The House of Representatives shall chuse (choose) their Speaker and other officers; and shall have the sole power of impeachment. The rest of your response is a later interpretation of what someone "thinks" the framers of the Constitution meant. I disagree with their interpretation. It would make no sense to elect a Speaker of the House who could neither sit in the House (except in the Visitor's Gallery), nor vote on, nor write any legislature.
Fay, the Constitution's meaning has been twisted around so much this past year or two, what's another twist!
Liz Cheney would be amazing!
Janet, yes, that's the problem. When Republican individuals in power stop following the Party line" and decide to do what is right, the entire party will turn on them and even get worse people elected in their place. I have no empathy for Wyoming, ditching Cheyney for one of those women trying to make waves in the party and beyond, but who are only allowed to get so far because white men rule with impunity and the threat always stays over their head that they too can be sacrificed if they live their oath and do what is right, particularly when one of their superiors wants them doing/supporting something else. Greene is a perfect Republican female stooge. She wants her name smeared all over the place, so she will do and say the crazy things that will get Republican attention and courtship among them. She has nothing really to offer, but that is just the way they like it, uh huh! When one is pretty ignorant of most things but has her face stuck in the bouquet of the ridiculous, it will mean you are able to be manipulated because you don't want to lose the press and the attention that you thrive on. Greene is that person. Should she head a committee, the committee will basically ignore her and do what they are called to do despite her whining and insulting that most Dems and a few Republicans are already sick of. Greene and a few others are trying to be Trump-light, but female. She and her cronies forget about misogyny. If she gets too much recognition, she will feel the hand holding her down and working hard to shut her up.
I'm kinda looking forward to watching Kevin or whoever is speaker, trying to reign her in. She thumbed her nose at him b4. Both she & Boebart need a muzzle with consequences... at least on the floors of Congress. All we can hope for is the LEAST.
Janet, I suspect you are right, but what would they learn that we don't already know. The ladies are trying to be big fish in a small misogynist pond and in order to get recognized, their natural drive to be nuts is coming out. They don't realize they are being used while they think they are using the party. They haven't figured out that it is in no way mutual use. White men would never permit that. Whenever Ms. Boebert and Ms. Greene become less attractive or too shrill or no longer useful, they will be shut up no matter how they fight. It is the lot of all Republican women. Heck, Susan Collins was used by Brett Kavanaugh, lying that he would not vote to overturn precedent when it came to Roe v. Wade. Of course he was lying, but Collins was "forced" to believe him if she wanted donations for her reelection. Hey ladies, that's how it always works for Republican women!
Regarding the Jan. 3rd vote for House Speaker, I write to note that at subscriber Jerry Weiss’s urgings I have contacted, via phone and email, both outgoing and incoming Democratic leadership plus two Democratic members of the House’s bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus. After introducing myself and crediting Jerry for the text (which can be found in the Dec. 20th Comment Section), I wrote the following:
Dear ,
As someone anxiously watching and waiting while Freedom Caucus extremists are extracting concession after concession from Kevin McCarthy, as he desperately attempts to get enough votes to become speaker, I rightly fear that far-right extremists will be setting the agenda for the next two years. Hence, I write to prevail upon Democrats, under leadership’s auspices, to join with seemingly more moderate Republicans, who already have signaled a willingness to work with like-minded people across the aisle, to find a consensus Speaker, one though publicly unified with moderates in support of McCarthy for Speaker, has indicated concerns regarding concessions already extracted.
While some might contend that peeling off a half dozen potential moderate votes is good strategy, I would maintain it likely would be easier to get 40 votes than 5. I base this judgment on the premise that moderates by their very nature are, well, moderate and would be reluctant to act boldly. Thus, the best candidate would be one who comes with substantial support from a host of establishment colleagues.
I can’t emphasize enough how urgent the moment is. We need our Democratic representatives in the House to use their 213 votes in support of a moderate Republican for Speaker. Here, I would underscore that the very thing that makes a moderate Republican suitable for the Speakership is his or her respect for governance and a normally functioning, problem-solving legislature. And that is precisely what the MAGA extremists seek to subvert. Their agenda of investigations and recriminations is intended to disrupt normal order in Congress. Allowing them to hold the spotlight with a succession of ugly, hate-filled investigations through 2024 would be analogous to a slow-motion, non-violent version of January 6th.
Therefore, knowing that without some plan our Republic is in grave danger, I urge Democrats to give their votes to a mutually agreeable alternative, who, in return, will reject Kevin McCarthy’s bid for speaker and raise public awareness that a cross-party coalition is possible.
My sincere thanks to whoever receives this letter and a request that it promptly be passed to…
Cordially,
Barbara Jo, I like your letter and hope it reached Dems who are willing to take the time to read and share it. The one thing we all must never do is give up in the presence of the crazies who are working to do their best to bring this nation down in favor of the fascism they are imagining for themselves. We do know better.
Ruth, At one point in an exchange with Jerry Weiss, he wrote, “Don’t convince yourself that it’s all futile, or it most certainly will be.”
The moderates are moderate?! Who knew?
Greg, To start, there is a distinction between the 10 Republicans who voted for Trump’s Second Impeachment, the 5 who voted in favor of requiring the IRS to conduct annual audits of the president’s tax returns, the 9 who voted to approve the $1.7 trillion omnibus bill, albeit problematic, to fund the government, the 39 who voted for the Respect For Marriage Act and the rest of the Republican Caucus that opposed all of the foregoing. I, further, would note the Republicans who cast these votes, by and large, also are members of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, the Main Street Caucus, and the Republican Governance Group, the latter being the organization Reich mentioned in reference to Joyce.
The point is that this cadre of Republicans, about 40 of whom held their seats, while publicly unified in urging House members to support Kevin McCarthy for Speaker, for the most part, are engaged with centrist Democrats in preliminary discussions about a possible contingency candidate if McCarthy, after multiple ballots, can’t get to 218 votes. Our job is to do whatever we can to convince as many of these Republicans as possible to vote for a mutually agreeable alternative on the first ballot.
That was ‘god send’.
Claire, Albeit delayed, I am deeply grateful for your kind words.
I think all House members who voted for impeachment are gone. I hope a few of their kind have replaced them, but I don't know. But I fully agree with you.
Jamie, (1) Of the 10 who voted for Trump’s Second Impeachment only Dan Newhouse (Wash) and David Valadao (Calif) held their seats. (2) Of the 5 who voted in favor of requiring the IRS to conduct annual audits of the president’s tax returns, none held their seats. (3) Of the 9 who voted to approve the $1.7 trillion omnibus bill to fund the government, 2 held their seats—Brian Fitzpatrick (PA) and Steve Womack (AK). (4) Of the 39 who voted for the Respect For Marriage Act, I understand most of them will be back this week.
I provide this information because I now understand a past “moderate” vote is not a sufficiently determining factor. We need to change minds either by fostering respect for institutions and/or by provoking fear of electoral losses.
We haven't been effective at convincing republicans. We have been effective at getting recalcitrant Democratic voters to the polls, though. We need more progressives in office everywhere.
Donna, While I apologize for my delayed response, I wanted to take this opportunity to state that I agree with your assessment. Still, borrowing from an astute fellow subscriber, I wish to add, whether or not we accomplish a stated goal, if important enough, we have no choice, in my view, but to renew our resolve to be diligent, continuing to form alliances where we can, and working together to heal our fractured society and struggling democracy.
Thanks for all that information! If there was a name in favor of all those bills that's sticking around, I'd say go for that person, but once in a blue moon voting for a good bill isn't sufficient. I noticed that Joyce wasn't mentioned at all, so I'm moving away from him as a choice. Best to follow Daniel Solomon's suggestion, which I've been advocating repeatedly myself, which is to enforce the clause in the Constitution that states that anyone who breaks their oath of office & engages in unlawful activity against the state should only be seated if at least 2/3 of the members vote to seat them. There are at least a dozen members of the House that qualify for expulsion, which could, at least temporarily, give the Democrats back the majority in the House.
Jamie, Though I realize some time has passed since you posted this comment, I, nonetheless, wanted to use this opportunity to state, that while I agree with your assessment, I don’t imagine said standard will be realized in the foreseeable future. Hence, I see no choice but to persist, particularly in urgent situations, with the knowledge that a single seemingly insignificant effort can produce powerful results.
On another matter, I would note, having done some research, that David Joyce’s name has appeared on several lists of Republicans who are receptive to working across the aisle.
Barbara. You are a keeper and a ‘got send’! I’ll always look for your sane comments/thinking.
Claire, While I apologize for the delayed reply, I write to say that I was deeply touched by your thoughtful and generous remarks.
Hahaha! Thanks for that, Greg.
Way to think outside the box! If McCarthy does win the job, it won't be for long. The Drama Queen Emeritus, a/k/a the Orange Blowhard, who is so addicted to provoking chaos, will wave his tiny finger to depose him soon just to show off his power.
Lame Duck a l’Orange.
With a side of ketchup and a slightly chilled Diet Coke.
Throw it at the wall and see what sticks.
Remember, ketchup is a vegetable, and you are what you eat.
🤮
Six months, tops.
Exactly. What would serve Trump's interests better, in running again for the nomination, than demonstrating his power by toppling the Speaker of the House? Classic Trump move. All of this is a "Made for Stefanik" power play, either as Speaker or VP candidate.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Trump getting rid of a Speaker would be "flexing" in the current vernacular.
I don’t think you’re wrong with that statement.
I keep waiting for the Brutus moment which I’ve consistently tied to Stefanik.
Or the Gonzalo moment:
"I have great comfort from this fellow: methinks he hath no drowning mark upon him; his complexion is perfect gallows. Stand fast, good Fate, to his hanging: make the rope of his destiny our cable, for our own doth little advantage. If he be not born to be hanged, our case is miserable."
-- Gonzalo, in William Shakespeare, The Tempest.
You and I are thinking alike. She's really special, in the Shakespearean (or Machiavellian) way.
It was when she started trying to match MAGA Jordan, Meadows, and Radcliffe during the Russia hearings that I first became aware of her. I knew immediately that she was “going places”. Her histrionics were 100% fake but once she dipped her toe into the Q rabbit holes I knew who she was. We do seem to be on the same page, I think.
Fun fact. Elise is married to Matthew Manda. Wikipedia: "As of 2022, Manda works as the manager of public affairs for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade association for firearms manufacturers." She blamed Pelosi for the January 6th Capitol riot. Pretty good for a Harvard girl, huh?
Stefanik. Watch her at any press interaction. She’s standing right beside McCarthy. I kind of see her left hip swinging over and bumping him away from the microphone. She’s smart and she’s got bigger plans for herself. It also makes her dangerous
She shoved Liz Cheney right out of the House and took her place. Nasty, nasty. She and DeSantis would make a great team driving the country over the cliff, exploding into a million pieces and going up in flames.
Drama Queen vs. Drag Queen, https://patch.com/florida/stpete/st-pete-artist-s-rhonda-santis-drag-stickers-benefits-equality-fl
Love it.
I hear your concern but the present Republican membership is locked in a party over country philosophy. They stand like duck pins waiting to be bowled over by a barrage of blind Trumpish lies still circulating through out our country. Robert, you have a plan which is more than I can say for the McCarthy camp. The Freedom Caucus seems to be holding poor Kevin in a rather precarious position. Without relenting to their demands this right wing group has Mr. McCarthy right where they want him, which isn't all together a bad thing knowing the make up of the man's political allegiance. Your background and experience carries enough weight to sway opinions looking for fundamental guidance. The Republican party with its control over the House will act like the Hoover Damn holding back the waters of a gentle woodland stream, President Biden's next two years are going to be a challenge at best. I stand with your thoughts about Joyce over McCarthy, looking at the alternative it makes good sense.
BREAKING: The MAGAts say they'll back McCarthy, but he has to agree to wear a clown hat and red nose whenever the House is in session.
Agree to wear what? Those added personal affects have been a part of his normal attire ever since he aligned himself with Trump. As for being a clown, he seems to have the shoes for it.
Never judge a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes.
That way, if he complains, you'll be a mile away, and you'll have his shoes.
Good point but recently I have change it to spending a day with my wife.
True, he will be indistinguishable from the rest of the cowardly MAGAts. Good camouflage for him, the gutless blunder.
False dichotomy.
Rope the dopes.
Dichotomy sounds like a disorder gamblers get from participating in a game of craps, throw in the practice of standing by the ropes and letting the other guy wear himself out through the repeated harmless punching of his opponent leaves me at a loss as to what your point is.
There is no choice.
Joyce offers no opposition; this is bullshit.
After you crap out, you lose the dice.
True, but the situation has no real positive solution. It's the lesser of two evils. Pass the dice until you get punch drunk.
Democrats do not get the dice. We have no say in it.
I say, challenge every MAGA before they are seated under Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution and House rules. 2/3 vote to be seated.
Agreed, hopefully the Republican held house will be so lost in internal disputes nothing of consequence will ever get done.
Absolutely, & by doing so, the Republicans would not have a majority [at least until those expelled members are replaced (by whom, I would not know)]. But Democrats never play hardball, even when supported by the Constitution.
IF Joyce will do it an some will vote for him and risk being primaried in the next Congressional election cycle
There is always that chance but where can they go other wise?
Unfortunately, ithis is not the time to discuss what would be nice. We must discuss what is possible given the present reality and what is at stake. Robert's suggestion seems to me to have the best chance of success. I hope the Democrats and nonMAGA Republicans go along with it.
Whatever strategy that can get virtually 100% Democratic support & cooperation by enough Republicans is what should happen. Whether that candidate is Joyce, Cheney, Kinzinger or somebody else, I can't be sure.
Hemlock or Arsenic. These people are despicable. And we are an international laughing stock for this mess that is the Republican Party. They waste the public's time and money with these soap operas. I like the way they just did it in Brazil. The outgoing president, a crony of Trump's who burned down the Amazon in the name of selfishness refused to present the presidential sash in the traditional ceremony to incoming president Lula. And so, a 33 year old garbage collector named Aline Sousa, representing the Brazilian people, put the presidential sash on Lula. Now here is what is going to happen to the Republican Party. The investors in them - their donors - are about tired of their foolishness. They are a bad investment. Adios, azzles. We don't need you. Biden is generating plenty of new business, and foreign capital is fleeing China, Russia, Europe, Africa to the stablest game in the world, the US stock market.
Notice where the Brazilian loser went..... to Florida of course. Cozying up to DeSantis. Why do we let such slimy “immigrants “in . I am shocked at DeSantis!!!!! Ha ha. This is where sarcasm really helps just before one loses his/her mind by shear exhaustion.
Not Desantis, Trump.
I saw that too. He will feel right at home.
Professor Reich, what are you doing to promote this idea to House Dems directly, besides writing it in this newsletter? You have access….I hope you are using it!!
Good question, Nancy. I would note, based on Reich’s Saturday (Nov. 17th) Coffee Klatch, subscriber Jerry Weiss, in the Dec. 20th Comment Section, posted several astute appeals, urging us to contact pertinent parties. About 2 hours ago, I posted the letter on this platform I had sent to outgoing and incoming Democratic leadership plus 2 Democratic members of the House bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus.
Admittedly, I don’t expect word from me to get the kind of attention a contact from Reich would get. Still, I believe if enough of us call and write (I did both), we could have an impact.
Bring James Joyce, at least he will tell beautiful stories!
A story about tRump would not be “Ulysses” but “Useless.”
You have my sympathy. I had to read “Portrait of the Artist” one summer in high school. It was beyond me.
Rebert, you gave Joyce the kiss of death. If he runs, next time he will be primariaried.
Members of the Joyce group include our three Batistiano members from Baghdad By the Sea: Mario Díaz-Balart, Carlos A. Giménez, and María Elvira Salazar, all who support the golpe (coup). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Governance_Group
Do ANY Republican House members reject the big lie? Will ANY refuse to sit with insurrectionists?
Joyce comes from a farm town adjacent to Tim Ryan's old district, where he was a law and order prosecuting attorney for 25 years. . His father was a coal salesman. Joyce is apparently not a member of the problem solvers' conference. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_Solvers_Caucus I bet a lot of his constituents work in Cleveland and the Mahoning Valley. Warren Buffett is one of his major contributors. https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/david-p-joyce/summary?cid=N00035007
It's good that Republicans are disorganized. Let the Republicans slit their own throats without any help from us.
Daniel,
While I understand the desire to let the Repubs stew, I must disagree. First of all, Putting Joyce in is another shot at the MAGA Trumpinistas. And secondly, this offers a route to getting a few things done over the next two years. Not everything Biden might want - there is no nirvana - but at least there would be some semblance of government functioning, which in and of itself is a remarkable and possibly wonderful thing to watch.
Joyce has NOT come forward. Who says he isn't MAGA?
Daniel, your question is relevant. Joyce sounds moderate, but hearing about his background makes me a little less willing to just give him the gavel.
If you reread Professor Reich's piece he makes this pretty clear.
Better WE should concentrate on refusing to seat insurrectionists and serial liars.
No Person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States…to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Object! Take a vote on eligibility on every member. Make a record.
Daniel, I like the reminder and think Congress needs to act on this one.
We are well on our way to my plan for a 4-party system. Join us now! Resistance is futile: you WILL be assimilated! Bwahahaha!
Remember, you heard it here first.
More parties and graduated voting where people vote their priorities
I just figured that Trump has the MAGA GOP in his hand, they are doing his will and proving that Trump owns the House GOP. In exchange for letting the MAGAs vote for McCarthy he wants their endorsement of him for 2024 and etc. He is proving that he owns the House GOP.
Yes. The true blue (actually red of course) MAGA types are in line against McCarthy. There are enough of them that the the Republican caucus is in a collective stew. Democrats breaking that with a few votes for a moderate can refute Trump and the MAGA crowd and provide for a functioning congress -- thus disproving and possibly breaking Trump's "ownership" of the House. Sort of like poisoning a malignant tumor with radiation.
Warren Buffett, aka Buffy the Union Slayer.
Oh good! I don't know who's who on the Repub side. So it could be another option.
Ah... I didn't listen to that this week. Thoughts ran in other directions, I guess.
Does it really matter who is speaker, or who controls the Congress? Here's the case...
ASSERTION: There is no credible argument which can support the idea that humanity can maintain arsenals of thousands of nuclear weapons and those weapons will never be used. To make such an assumption is to completely ignore human history and human psychology, that is, to live in a very dangerous fantasy.
If you can accept that claim, then the next step should be to see which political party is doing the most to protect the nation from the ultimate calamity. Those citizens who are capable of being somewhat objective, somewhat honest, and at least trying to escape their preferred tribal bubble, should see this...
When it comes to saving America from an inevitable nuclear holocaust, BOTH parties are equally worthless. Completely worthless. There's not only no leadership, neither party really has much to say on the matter. This is true even in presidential campaigns when we are selecting a single human being to have sole authority over America's nuclear arsenal.
When it comes to all kinds of smaller issues there is a meaningful difference between the parties which is why I've been a Democrat longer than many of you have been alive. But when it comes to the survival of the nation, both parties are basically brain dead asleep at the wheel.
Here's who should be Speaker of the House. Anybody, literally anybody, who promises to speak about nothing but nuclear weapons for the duration of their term. A term which will be short, I agree. But even a few days of being an actual leader beats no days at all.
Guys and gals, political blogs all over the net talk about almost nothing beyond why "we are good and they are bad". I know this is fun, but I'm sorry, we just can't afford this hobby.
Nuclear annihilation is 1 of the 2 major existential threats mankind faces, the other being biospheric collapse due to anthropogenic climate chaos, ecosystem disintegration, environmental destruction, mass extinction, etc., & government officials have done next to nothing positive on either count.
Great points Jaime, thanks for joining in. Yes, you're right, every threat you mention is very important too.
We should look at existential threats, those factors capable of bringing down the entire system, in a holistic manner. When it comes to existential threats, it's not good enough to win on just this or that issue, we have to win on them all.
You're a musician in Oregon? You lucky dog! I've been a wannabe musician for years (getting worse all the time) and Oregon has always been my favorite fantasy destination. I hitchhiked out there from Florida in the 70s, but didn't have it together enough at the time to stay.
Thanks for commenting!
Thanks much for the likes folks. Still hoping for engagement too. If what I've claimed is generally true, why should we care who is Speaker Of The House? Whatever they accomplish will be swept away in a coming tsunami of chaos, right? And whoever the next Speaker might be, it's not likely they're going to do much to prevent that, yes?
And so dear friends and my fellow Americans upon this basis I hereby nominate Foghorn Leghorn as the next Speaker, because he's at least fun to look at!
https://149347630.v2.pressablecdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Foghorn-Leghorn-380x285.jpg
I hadn’t heard of Rep. Joyce before, but this sounds like a reasonable solution that will avoid the chaotic MAGA circus we’ll be subject to otherwise.
As a retired sound man, I have to know: as Speaker, will he be a Woofer and not a Tweeter? We've had enough of those.
BTW, this would be the definition of a passive crossover. (An even more obscure sound-man pun.)
I think the Democrats should take your advice and hold their nose and vote as you suggested
I don't have a vote - not from Melbourne, Australia. If I did, it would be for Joyce. It's a step back to sanity. The world needs America to move back to where it was BT - before Trump.
This is too much in the weeds for me.
I still say, don't trust any Republican ... not one.
Hell ... we can barely trust Democrats to live up to their promises.
Dr. Reich, do not get distracted! Focus should be be on "Why has the DOJ not yet acted to arrest T45?" It would resolve many issues that you try to address and would bring down the GOP (#GravediggersOfDemocracy) - not just MAGA - house of cards.