milosh said:Biden said he is not necessarily enjoying the fight in the GOP. "How do you think it looks to the rest of the world?"
— Bob Costantini (@CostantiniWHear) January 4, 2023
"This is not a good look." "And I hope they get their act together."
Because a president with mental deficiencies is a great look.Rockdoc said:milosh said:Biden said he is not necessarily enjoying the fight in the GOP. "How do you think it looks to the rest of the world?"
— Bob Costantini (@CostantiniWHear) January 4, 2023
"This is not a good look." "And I hope they get their act together."
Now that's funny. Poor old dementia ridden idiot.
I have found that often times, the best person for a leadership role is the one that doesn't want the job. They tend to not be as self-serving.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
Agreed.96ags said:I have found that often times, the best person for a leadership role is the one that doesn't want the job. They tend to not be as self-serving.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
The reason Jordan doesn't want to be Speaker is because then he couldn't serve as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee.The investigations he wants to do could otherwise be thwarted and he wants to run that show himself. He's very tenacious.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
Hence why Scalise is the compromiseaggiehawg said:The reason Jordan doesn't want to be Speaker is because then he couldn't serve as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee.The investigations he wants to do could otherwise be thwarted and he wants to run that show himself. He's very tenacious.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
I understand that to be by tradition only. There is really nothing keeping Jordan from being chairman of that too.aggiehawg said:The reason Jordan doesn't want to be Speaker is because then he couldn't serve as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee.The investigations he wants to do could otherwise be thwarted and he wants to run that show himself. He's very tenacious.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
Pretty much where I have been for awhile.Quote:
Hence why Scalise is the compromise
Merely not having the votes doesn't seem to be enough of a reason to delay the vote. There have been 100+ votres in the past. Could it be that momentum is building behind somebody else?Agthatbuilds said:
Mccarthy trying to delay the 4th vote until tomorrow.
He doesn't have the votes. The democrats and probably some Republicans will probably be able to thwart adjourning for the day.
Paul Ryan didn't want to be speaker. How did that turn out?96ags said:I have found that often times, the best person for a leadership role is the one that doesn't want the job. They tend to not be as self-serving.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
Most tone-deaf administration ever.Daddy-O5 said:milosh said:Biden said he is not necessarily enjoying the fight in the GOP. "How do you think it looks to the rest of the world?"
— Bob Costantini (@CostantiniWHear) January 4, 2023
"This is not a good look." "And I hope they get their act together."
Biden accusing anyone else of creating a bad look for the country.
What a lazy take.twk said:Paul Ryan didn't want to be speaker. How did that turn out?96ags said:I have found that often times, the best person for a leadership role is the one that doesn't want the job. They tend to not be as self-serving.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
This is just another stupid talking point to justify taking hostages. If the caucus gives in this time, they will never be able to unite on anything else. Everyone had their chance to run for speaker in the caucus and McCarthy won. Trying to hold the vote hostage is must more sore loser behavior.
You voted for this Chinese puppet.milosh said:Biden said he is not necessarily enjoying the fight in the GOP. "How do you think it looks to the rest of the world?"
— Bob Costantini (@CostantiniWHear) January 4, 2023
"This is not a good look." "And I hope they get their act together."
The "sore loser" argument is the stupid talking point here. Of those 19 only 1 has put himself in for it. The others simply want somebody more conservative to be speaker.twk said:Paul Ryan didn't want to be speaker. How did that turn out?96ags said:I have found that often times, the best person for a leadership role is the one that doesn't want the job. They tend to not be as self-serving.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
This is just another stupid talking point to justify taking hostages. If the caucus gives in this time, they will never be able to unite on anything else. Everyone had their chance to run for speaker in the caucus and McCarthy won. Trying to hold the vote hostage is must more sore loser behavior.
McCarthy didn't do his job. The caucus doesn't speak for individual reps.twk said:Paul Ryan didn't want to be speaker. How did that turn out?96ags said:I have found that often times, the best person for a leadership role is the one that doesn't want the job. They tend to not be as self-serving.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
This is just another stupid talking point to justify taking hostages. If the caucus gives in this time, they will never be able to unite on anything else. Everyone had their chance to run for speaker in the caucus and McCarthy won. Trying to hold the vote hostage is must more sore loser behavior.
aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
I'm not a virtue signalling moron. That's who's pushing this.aTmAg said:The "sore loser" argument is the stupid talking point here. Of those 19 only 1 has put himself in for it. The others simply want somebody more conservative to be speaker.twk said:Paul Ryan didn't want to be speaker. How did that turn out?96ags said:I have found that often times, the best person for a leadership role is the one that doesn't want the job. They tend to not be as self-serving.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
This is just another stupid talking point to justify taking hostages. If the caucus gives in this time, they will never be able to unite on anything else. Everyone had their chance to run for speaker in the caucus and McCarthy won. Trying to hold the vote hostage is must more sore loser behavior.
Let me guess, you are all talk on small government? Or are you perfectly fine with bigger government?
They should lose their committee assignments. That's part of the deal when you join a caucus -- the caucus gets you the committee assignment, but it also selects the leadership as part of a caucus vote. These guys want their committee assignments, but don't want to support the caucus vote for leadership. It's rank hypocrisy.Irish 2.0 said:McCarthy didn't do his job. The caucus doesn't speak for individual reps.twk said:Paul Ryan didn't want to be speaker. How did that turn out?96ags said:I have found that often times, the best person for a leadership role is the one that doesn't want the job. They tend to not be as self-serving.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
This is just another stupid talking point to justify taking hostages. If the caucus gives in this time, they will never be able to unite on anything else. Everyone had their chance to run for speaker in the caucus and McCarthy won. Trying to hold the vote hostage is must more sore loser behavior.
I'm tired of this "next in line" bull**** that has given us the likes of W, McCain, and Romney. McCarthy hasn't earned **** and if he couldn'tt whip the votes for his own speakership prior to the vote, how do you expect him to lead.
Lets not forget he has THREATENED those who have opposed him with stripping them of their committee assignments. There is no reason for the 20 to switch their votes. McCarthy has jockeyed for this job for years and frankly that is frightening to some because you realize that it is for power and ego at that point.
They tried to, but McCarthy brushed them off!! It has been said numerous times that McCarthy ignored these people because he thought the GOP had the midterms locked in a landslide. McCarthy assumed he could use the incoming GOP members to push him over. It isn't the case. He played his hand wrong.twk said:I'm not a virtue signalling moron. That's who's pushing this.aTmAg said:The "sore loser" argument is the stupid talking point here. Of those 19 only 1 has put himself in for it. The others simply want somebody more conservative to be speaker.twk said:Paul Ryan didn't want to be speaker. How did that turn out?96ags said:I have found that often times, the best person for a leadership role is the one that doesn't want the job. They tend to not be as self-serving.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
This is just another stupid talking point to justify taking hostages. If the caucus gives in this time, they will never be able to unite on anything else. Everyone had their chance to run for speaker in the caucus and McCarthy won. Trying to hold the vote hostage is must more sore loser behavior.
Let me guess, you are all talk on small government? Or are you perfectly fine with bigger government?
I'd be fine with Jordan or Scalise, or any number of other folks, but this should have been debated and decided in the caucus. Gaetz et al couldn't find anyone who appealed to the broader caucus who would run, ergo, they lost. Now, they are trying to get around that by withholding their vote on the floor and holding the whole House hostage until they get their way. That's not leadership.
Same bait and switch the Dems used on Regan. Whatever.Quote:
Nancy Freaking Pelosi offered Trump 25 billion to build his wall for a path to citizenship of the so called dreamers. Not all illegal aliens, but a subset of them. He was ready to accept it and then Ann Coulter got pissed and went on Tucker and the deal was killed. Then in a very Obamaesque fashion Trump's lawyers squinted their eyes and said he didn't need Congress to spend money and tried to divert less than 1/10th of the 25 billion number to pay for the wall. Which he never got to spend due to litigation.
So Pelosi was set to codify into law, not a dubious interpretation, but a law with funds appropriated the building of a wall on the southern border and we turned it down. Does that sound smart? Of course not, it was dumb and the "base" cheered it on. That's why we're a dumb people and get the government we deserve.
Money and power. Dems have no problem growing the govt as much as possible, so it's easier for them to follow along like sheep. They don't have any factions in their party that want to pull back.fka ftc said:
I big part of the Dem singularity is due to one reason, and its the obvious one posted previously by another poster. Its money.
McCarthy is losing it.
— Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) January 4, 2023
He texted one of my colleagues who didn’t vote for him:
“I am ready to fund an endless war”
I’m assuming this is in *addition* to Ukraine.
Zarathustra said:McCarthy is losing it.
— Matt Gaetz (@mattgaetz) January 4, 2023
He texted one of my colleagues who didn’t vote for him:
“I am ready to fund an endless war”
I’m assuming this is in *addition* to Ukraine.
I'm sure McCarthy has made his share of dumb moves, but, if that's the basis for wanting someone else as speaker, the time to beat him was in the caucus vote. That's how the house is organized. Going around the caucus to try to sabotage the elected leadership is the wrong way to handle objections to the leadership.Irish 2.0 said:They tried to, but McCarthy brushed them off!! It has been said numerous times that McCarthy ignored these people because he thought the GOP had the midterms locked in a landslide. McCarthy assumed he could use the incoming GOP members to push him over. It isn't the case. He played his hand wrong.twk said:I'm not a virtue signalling moron. That's who's pushing this.aTmAg said:The "sore loser" argument is the stupid talking point here. Of those 19 only 1 has put himself in for it. The others simply want somebody more conservative to be speaker.twk said:Paul Ryan didn't want to be speaker. How did that turn out?96ags said:I have found that often times, the best person for a leadership role is the one that doesn't want the job. They tend to not be as self-serving.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
This is just another stupid talking point to justify taking hostages. If the caucus gives in this time, they will never be able to unite on anything else. Everyone had their chance to run for speaker in the caucus and McCarthy won. Trying to hold the vote hostage is must more sore loser behavior.
Let me guess, you are all talk on small government? Or are you perfectly fine with bigger government?
I'd be fine with Jordan or Scalise, or any number of other folks, but this should have been debated and decided in the caucus. Gaetz et al couldn't find anyone who appealed to the broader caucus who would run, ergo, they lost. Now, they are trying to get around that by withholding their vote on the floor and holding the whole House hostage until they get their way. That's not leadership.
That's not leadership. That is arrogance.
That's the thing; he isn't the elected leadership for the role of Speaker and he won't be.twk said:I'm sure McCarthy has made his share of dumb moves, but, if that's the basis for wanting someone else as speaker, the time to beat him was in the caucus vote. That's how the house is organized. Going around the caucus to try to sabotage the elected leadership is the wrong way to handle objections to the leadership.Irish 2.0 said:They tried to, but McCarthy brushed them off!! It has been said numerous times that McCarthy ignored these people because he thought the GOP had the midterms locked in a landslide. McCarthy assumed he could use the incoming GOP members to push him over. It isn't the case. He played his hand wrong.twk said:I'm not a virtue signalling moron. That's who's pushing this.aTmAg said:The "sore loser" argument is the stupid talking point here. Of those 19 only 1 has put himself in for it. The others simply want somebody more conservative to be speaker.twk said:Paul Ryan didn't want to be speaker. How did that turn out?96ags said:I have found that often times, the best person for a leadership role is the one that doesn't want the job. They tend to not be as self-serving.aTmAg said:
Reagan didn't want to be president either. Yet he ran and won and was the best president in our lifetimes. Stop with that idiotic talking point.
This is just another stupid talking point to justify taking hostages. If the caucus gives in this time, they will never be able to unite on anything else. Everyone had their chance to run for speaker in the caucus and McCarthy won. Trying to hold the vote hostage is must more sore loser behavior.
Let me guess, you are all talk on small government? Or are you perfectly fine with bigger government?
I'd be fine with Jordan or Scalise, or any number of other folks, but this should have been debated and decided in the caucus. Gaetz et al couldn't find anyone who appealed to the broader caucus who would run, ergo, they lost. Now, they are trying to get around that by withholding their vote on the floor and holding the whole House hostage until they get their way. That's not leadership.
That's not leadership. That is arrogance.