McCarthy getting speaker?

151,773 Views | 2450 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by lil99chris
Daddy-O5
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to J. Walter Weatherman • 8:31a, 1/6/23
AG
J. Walter Weatherman said:
Daddy-O5 said:
J. Walter Weatherman said:
Daddy-O5 said:
While the tweet itself appears to be inaccurate, the link quoted shouldn't inspire much confidence in any conservatives. It speaks for itself.


Lol it doesn't "appear to be" inaccurate. She's straight up lying for clicks/engagement. And people here will continue to fall for this crap if you don't do just a tiny bit of research if something seems unbelievable on the surface.


Corrected, deleted, and acknowledged regarding the tweet. What are your thoughts are the actual link?


The people who created that page seem to think republicans should automatically vote no on every single bill that goes forward. Might sound fun in principle, and I'm sure people like Boebert who are only doing this to get famous enjoy that, but (in my opinion) not a practical way to govern in the real world.


My focus is less on what the website itself claims he should've done, and more on what he actually has voted for in recent history. And there's a clear trend of voting for bloated spending bills, that support causes/policy I think many of us would disagree with, and with very little concessions for conservatives (if any?). Yet we're supposed to go "ho hum, you gotta do what you gotta do sometimes!"

At bare minimum I have no idea why someone with his voting record should somehow be considered a lock for speaker, much less berate those who want to have an actual debate about it.
Reply Quote
17
2 edits
American Hardwood
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:47a, 1/6/23
AG
According to that site, McCarthy is in a 5-way tie for dead last for the GOP. He scores closer to Ilhan Omar than he does Jim Jordan.

Edit: user error. He is not in a 5-way tie for dead last. I had a sort snafu, but he does score closer to Omar than Jordan and still very poorly overall.
Reply Quote
6
1 edit
J. Walter Weatherman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Daddy-O5 • 8:52a, 1/6/23
Daddy-O5 said:
J. Walter Weatherman said:
Daddy-O5 said:
J. Walter Weatherman said:
Daddy-O5 said:
While the tweet itself appears to be inaccurate, the link quoted shouldn't inspire much confidence in any conservatives. It speaks for itself.


Lol it doesn't "appear to be" inaccurate. She's straight up lying for clicks/engagement. And people here will continue to fall for this crap if you don't do just a tiny bit of research if something seems unbelievable on the surface.


Corrected, deleted, and acknowledged regarding the tweet. What are your thoughts are the actual link?


The people who created that page seem to think republicans should automatically vote no on every single bill that goes forward. Might sound fun in principle, and I'm sure people like Boebert who are only doing this to get famous enjoy that, but (in my opinion) not a practical way to govern in the real world.


My focus is less on what the website itself claims he should've done, and more on what he actually has voted for in recent history. And there's a clear trend of voting for bloated spending bills, that support causes/policy I think many of us would disagree with, and with very little concessions for conservatives (if any?). Yet we're supposed to go "ho hum, you gotta do what you gotta do sometimes!"

At bare minimum I have no idea why someone with his voting record should somehow be considered a lock for speaker, much less berate those who want to have an actual debate about it.


That's certainly fair, but I think the site is oversimplifying a number of those votes to paint them as worse than they are, and it's also has a few objectively false items too.

As one example - "pass a $1.5 trillion Omnibus funding Biden's vaccine mandates." Is 1. Not true (he voted against it) and 2. Not an accurate representation of what the bill is in the first place, as it is a funding mechanism for the entire government and not meant to fund the vaccine mandate. Not even sure what the vaccine has to do with it and it was clearly included in that way to fire up the anti Covid vax crowd.

Another one "Bail out the Post Office and stick Medicare with the bill." Is also a giant oversimplification of what that bill was. By the way, Scalise, who seems to be the main alternative choice, also voted for that.

The site also dings him for voting for the original Covid bailouts, which were more or less unanimous. I guess the broader point is that sources like that seem solely written to generate a reaction probably need a little more scrutiny before rushing to share them.
Reply Quote
5
2 edits
McInnis 03
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:27a, 1/6/23
AG


Reply Quote
1
1 edit
Irish 2.0
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to McInnis 03 • 9:30a, 1/6/23
McInnis 03 said:


I'm not sure he can sway enough to get to 218. There are at least 3 that say no McCarthy period as of now.
Reply Quote
4
1872walker
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:30a, 1/6/23
Any outcome that results in McCarthy holding the gavel is unacceptable. He is an untrustworthy rat who hasn't held a real job.
Reply Quote
17
twk
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 1872walker • 9:37a, 1/6/23
AG
1872walker said:
Any outcome that results in McCarthy holding the gavel is unacceptable. He is an untrustworthy rat who hasn't held a real job.
That makes this whole thing totally personal, and not something done out of principal.

There is a very good article in the WSJ which shows the legitimate things that could be gained by the 20, if they are willing to declare victory and move on.

Quote:
No Republican disputes that the institution no longer operates as the Founders intended. Congress hasn't complied with its own budget process for more than two decades, though that's proved the least of the recent dysfunction. Beginning with Nancy Pelosi's forced march of ObamaCare in 2009-10, speakers increasingly have centralized control to their office. Committees barely function. Members have no ability to debate or amend. Leaders disappear into back rooms to cook up mammoth bills that are dropped on the floor for last-minute take-it-or-leave it votes. Add Mrs. Pelosi's Covid "proxy" voting rules, and most of the House didn't even bother to clock in.

This is bad for democracy. It makes a mockery of representative government and it also plays a big role in today's partisanship, since it robs members of the opportunity to work together. But as the rebels note, it's particularly bad for conservative causes. Big-government types love back-room legislating, since it produces vehicles for giant spending and bad policy that nobody has time to expose or stop. Those hastily written products also tend to be (purposely?) vague, empowering the bureaucratic state to fill in the regulatory blanks.

House Freedom Caucus members as early as last summer began demanding a fix should Republicans take power. Mr. McCarthy largely ignored them until the close midterm results meant he no longer could. Yet in the negotiations leading up to this week's speaker votes, he agreed to sweeping changes.

Under the proposed new rules package, committees are back in charge of legislation, with rules designed to ensure that bills address single subjectsrather than catch-all legislation. It similarly gives members new power to challenge amendments that aren't related to the topic at hand. And it revives "Calendar Wednesday," whereby any committee chairman can bring a bill straight to the floor.

It includes new provisions for accountability and transparency. Proxy voting is history, as are virtual committee meetings. It requires a 72-hour rule to give members time to read legislation. It ends Democrats' wild experiment with staffer unionization, which threatened to tie the chamber up with crazy demands.

And it makes it much harder for the House to tax and spend. It imposes a "cut go" rulerequiring any mandatory spending increases be offset with equal or greater mandatory spending cuts. A three-fifths supermajority vote will be required for tax increases. It revives what's known as the "Holman rule," allowing appropriations bills effectively to defund the salaries of specific executive-branch officials or specific programs. It also requires each committee to submit an oversight plan that lays out what action it intends to take on unauthorized or duplicative programs.

These changes will produce the first functioning House in years, even as they tie the hands of spenders. Take the win! Instead, the rebels continue to hold out for provisions that have the potential to negate this victory by plunging the House back into chaos. At the top of the list is the continued demand to allow any Republican member to call for a motion to "vacate the chair"essentially a snap vote to oust the speaker.
WSJ (KIm Strassel): GOP Rebels Need to Take the Win
Reply Quote
7
1872walker
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to twk • 9:40a, 1/6/23
It's personal in that McCarthy has shown himself to be untrustworthy in his dealings. That should be reason enough to exclude him from consideration.



The House can achieve all of those things while having a more principled Speaker. This has the potential to be a seminal moment in politics (and our Country). The Freedom Caucus needs to press onward.
Reply Quote
14
2 edits
IndividualFreedom
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:45a, 1/6/23
If the 20 are going to fold, Lauren shares what it will take. If they do, I guess they put up a good fight for concessions that are important.



I do not see mccarthy doing any of this, so I do not see the 20 changing their vote.
Reply Quote
2
IndividualFreedom
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 1872walker • 9:46a, 1/6/23
Ha!!! We were thinking alike.
Reply Quote
Irish 2.0
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to twk • 9:48a, 1/6/23
twk said:
1872walker said:
Any outcome that results in McCarthy holding the gavel is unacceptable. He is an untrustworthy rat who hasn't held a real job.
That makes this whole thing totally personal, and not something done out of principal.

There is a very good article in the WSJ which shows the legitimate things that could be gained by the 20, if they are willing to declare victory and move on.

Quote:
No Republican disputes that the institution no longer operates as the Founders intended. Congress hasn't complied with its own budget process for more than two decades, though that's proved the least of the recent dysfunction. Beginning with Nancy Pelosi's forced march of ObamaCare in 2009-10, speakers increasingly have centralized control to their office. Committees barely function. Members have no ability to debate or amend. Leaders disappear into back rooms to cook up mammoth bills that are dropped on the floor for last-minute take-it-or-leave it votes. Add Mrs. Pelosi's Covid "proxy" voting rules, and most of the House didn't even bother to clock in.

This is bad for democracy. It makes a mockery of representative government and it also plays a big role in today's partisanship, since it robs members of the opportunity to work together. But as the rebels note, it's particularly bad for conservative causes. Big-government types love back-room legislating, since it produces vehicles for giant spending and bad policy that nobody has time to expose or stop. Those hastily written products also tend to be (purposely?) vague, empowering the bureaucratic state to fill in the regulatory blanks.

House Freedom Caucus members as early as last summer began demanding a fix should Republicans take power. Mr. McCarthy largely ignored them until the close midterm results meant he no longer could. Yet in the negotiations leading up to this week's speaker votes, he agreed to sweeping changes.

Under the proposed new rules package, committees are back in charge of legislation, with rules designed to ensure that bills address single subjectsrather than catch-all legislation. It similarly gives members new power to challenge amendments that aren't related to the topic at hand. And it revives "Calendar Wednesday," whereby any committee chairman can bring a bill straight to the floor.

It includes new provisions for accountability and transparency. Proxy voting is history, as are virtual committee meetings. It requires a 72-hour rule to give members time to read legislation. It ends Democrats' wild experiment with staffer unionization, which threatened to tie the chamber up with crazy demands.

And it makes it much harder for the House to tax and spend. It imposes a "cut go" rulerequiring any mandatory spending increases be offset with equal or greater mandatory spending cuts. A three-fifths supermajority vote will be required for tax increases. It revives what's known as the "Holman rule," allowing appropriations bills effectively to defund the salaries of specific executive-branch officials or specific programs. It also requires each committee to submit an oversight plan that lays out what action it intends to take on unauthorized or duplicative programs.

These changes will produce the first functioning House in years, even as they tie the hands of spenders. Take the win! Instead, the rebels continue to hold out for provisions that have the potential to negate this victory by plunging the House back into chaos. At the top of the list is the continued demand to allow any Republican member to call for a motion to "vacate the chair"essentially a snap vote to oust the speaker.
WSJ (KIm Strassel): GOP Rebels Need to Take the Win
Well it is personal. The fact that these logical things to conservatives are considered concessions to McCarthy instead of his intentions tells the story. Why did the majority of these have to be concessions to McCarthy? Aren't they things deemed and considered conservative principles?
Reply Quote
19
1 edit
1872walker
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Irish 2.0 • 9:51a, 1/6/23
Very well said. McCarthy is absolutely the wrong person for the role.
Reply Quote
6
McInnis 03
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:53a, 1/6/23
AG

Reply Quote
12
Irish 2.0
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to McInnis 03 • 9:54a, 1/6/23
McInnis 03 said:

Reply Quote
7
McInnis 03
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Irish 2.0 • 9:56a, 1/6/23
AG
I guess we can expect rounds 12, 13, 14, and maybe even 15 today.
Reply Quote
5
IndividualFreedom
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to McInnis 03 • 10:01a, 1/6/23
I think so but if we start to see mccathy's side losing numbers, I think it snowballs quickly. The unprotested claim of threat will and should make the needle move for those that want to be seen as a legit congressman.
Reply Quote
7
1872walker
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to IndividualFreedom • 10:04a, 1/6/23
Yep. There are undoubtedly countless Republicans who are toeing the line out of fear of retribution from the establishment. If one or two will stand up and join the 20 in today's votes, I think momentum shifts quickly and significantly and the barn doors fly open.
Reply Quote
13
Charpie
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:12a, 1/6/23
AG
chaos is fun
Reply Quote
3
samurai_science
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Charpie • 10:13a, 1/6/23
Charpie said:
chaos is fun
It's not chaos, its just how democracy works, you know, spirited debate, and its not new.
Reply Quote
12
1 edit
1872walker
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to samurai_science • 10:14a, 1/6/23
It's just something that rarely happens in today's Congress. And that's unfortunate.
Reply Quote
9
Tony Franklins Other Shoe
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Irish 2.0 • 10:19a, 1/6/23
AG
Irish 2.0 said:
twk said:
1872walker said:
Any outcome that results in McCarthy holding the gavel is unacceptable. He is an untrustworthy rat who hasn't held a real job.
That makes this whole thing totally personal, and not something done out of principal.

There is a very good article in the WSJ which shows the legitimate things that could be gained by the 20, if they are willing to declare victory and move on.

Quote:
No Republican disputes that the institution no longer operates as the Founders intended. Congress hasn't complied with its own budget process for more than two decades, though that's proved the least of the recent dysfunction. Beginning with Nancy Pelosi's forced march of ObamaCare in 2009-10, speakers increasingly have centralized control to their office. Committees barely function. Members have no ability to debate or amend. Leaders disappear into back rooms to cook up mammoth bills that are dropped on the floor for last-minute take-it-or-leave it votes. Add Mrs. Pelosi's Covid "proxy" voting rules, and most of the House didn't even bother to clock in.

This is bad for democracy. It makes a mockery of representative government and it also plays a big role in today's partisanship, since it robs members of the opportunity to work together. But as the rebels note, it's particularly bad for conservative causes. Big-government types love back-room legislating, since it produces vehicles for giant spending and bad policy that nobody has time to expose or stop. Those hastily written products also tend to be (purposely?) vague, empowering the bureaucratic state to fill in the regulatory blanks.

House Freedom Caucus members as early as last summer began demanding a fix should Republicans take power. Mr. McCarthy largely ignored them until the close midterm results meant he no longer could. Yet in the negotiations leading up to this week's speaker votes, he agreed to sweeping changes.

Under the proposed new rules package, committees are back in charge of legislation, with rules designed to ensure that bills address single subjectsrather than catch-all legislation. It similarly gives members new power to challenge amendments that aren't related to the topic at hand. And it revives "Calendar Wednesday," whereby any committee chairman can bring a bill straight to the floor.

It includes new provisions for accountability and transparency. Proxy voting is history, as are virtual committee meetings. It requires a 72-hour rule to give members time to read legislation. It ends Democrats' wild experiment with staffer unionization, which threatened to tie the chamber up with crazy demands.

And it makes it much harder for the House to tax and spend. It imposes a "cut go" rulerequiring any mandatory spending increases be offset with equal or greater mandatory spending cuts. A three-fifths supermajority vote will be required for tax increases. It revives what's known as the "Holman rule," allowing appropriations bills effectively to defund the salaries of specific executive-branch officials or specific programs. It also requires each committee to submit an oversight plan that lays out what action it intends to take on unauthorized or duplicative programs.

These changes will produce the first functioning House in years, even as they tie the hands of spenders. Take the win! Instead, the rebels continue to hold out for provisions that have the potential to negate this victory by plunging the House back into chaos. At the top of the list is the continued demand to allow any Republican member to call for a motion to "vacate the chair"essentially a snap vote to oust the speaker.
WSJ (KIm Strassel): GOP Rebels Need to Take the Win
Well it is personal. The fact that these logical things to conservatives are considered concessions to McCarthy instead of his intentions tells the story. Why did the majority of these have to be concessions to McCarthy? Aren't they things deemed and considered conservative principles?
Seems pretty logical to me. Now that the clear line has been drawn to say "we are the House of Congress, let's legislate properly", if that doesn't suffice, then we are completely broken and it's time to let the house of cards fall to start all over. Insanity is what we have now. No reason to keep doing the same thing.

Person Not Capable of Pregnancy
Reply Quote
4
damiond
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to McInnis 03 • 10:21a, 1/6/23
McInnis 03 said:

Reply Quote
4
McInnis 03
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to IndividualFreedom • 10:25a, 1/6/23
AG
IndividualFreedom said:
I think so but if we start to see mccathy's side losing numbers, I think it snowballs quickly. The unprotested claim of threat will and should make the needle move for those that want to be seen as a legit congressman.
I don't know that there's a single one with the cojones to do it.
Reply Quote
1
javajaws
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 1872walker • 10:25a, 1/6/23
AG
1872walker said:
It's personal in that McCarthy has shown himself to be untrustworthy in his dealings. That should be reason enough to exclude him from consideration.



The House can achieve all of those things while having a more principled Speaker. This has the potential to be a seminal moment in politics (and our Country). The Freedom Caucus needs to press onward.
She has more balls than all those RINOs put together. Good for her for standing up to the establishment. She is right - THIS is how our government SHOULD work - not just rubber stamping what some appointed leader tells you to do.
Reply Quote
13
IndividualFreedom
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 1872walker • 10:30a, 1/6/23
Absolutely.

In the past, none of this would have been discussed. After our 20 stood up and debated, we are seeing the truth behind the scene. This is what is should look like. These are my expectations of the congressman I voted for.

Take a second and review the list of items Lauren mentioned they are standing up for. Are their any not worth fighting for? We are seeing what we all want to see and I am giving a slow clap applause as it unfolds.
Reply Quote
13
Daddy-O5
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to samurai_science • 10:34a, 1/6/23
AG
samurai_science said:
Charpie said:
chaos is fun
It's not chaos, its just how democracy works, you know, spirited debate, and its not new.


Unfortunately it kind of is these days. Which makes what's going on now all that more refreshing.
Reply Quote
1
BCSWguru
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:35a, 1/6/23
why do they keep having votes when the results are going to be the same every time?
Reply Quote
3
96ags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:36a, 1/6/23
AG
Congress has been in a proverbial hole for a long time. At least this sort of feels like they may at least stop digging.

Reply Quote
4
Cyprian
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:36a, 1/6/23
AG
I'd be ok with no Speaker for a while longer.... that's taking limited gov't to a whole new Meta-Level!
Reply Quote
samurai_science
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Cyprian • 10:38a, 1/6/23
Cyprian said:
I'd be ok with no Speaker for a while longer.... that's taking limited gov't to a whole new Meta-Level!
Democrats control the Senate, so no bills would go anywhere anyway.
Reply Quote
1
doubledog
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:39a, 1/6/23
The longer the 19+ hold out, the longer Hunter has to hide his crack pipes.

Just sayin.
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
FireAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:40a, 1/6/23
AG
I'm in favor of whatever tactics are necessary to usher back in fiscal conservatism that has been absent from government since Reagan left office…

Stop cutting deals for pet projects that cost taxpayers billions, and start being a government of the people once again…
Reply Quote
7
Irish 2.0
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to doubledog • 10:40a, 1/6/23
doubledog said:
The longer the 19+ hold out, the longer Hunter has to hide is crack pipes.

Just sayin.
Biden is going to pardon him anyways. I want to see the laptop dragged out into the open. But lets not fool outselves thinking that crackhead will ever see a prison cell
Reply Quote
3
McInnis 03
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BCSWguru • 10:40a, 1/6/23
AG
LSCSN said:
why do they keep having votes when the results are going to be the same every time?
The process has never been updated since the origination.

The ability to adjourn for discussion is limited to majority agreement and in this situation, there seems to be no majority agreement in anything.
Reply Quote
1
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to doubledog • 10:41a, 1/6/23
AG
doubledog said:
The longer the 19+ hold out, the longer Hunter has to hide is crack pipes.

Just sayin.


lol at a bunch of RINOs doing anything of substance.
Reply Quote
2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.