Democrats: Rules, Shmules
[Guest post by DRJ]
Florida Rep. Alcee Hastings: “When the deal goes down, all this talk about rules … We make them up as we go along.”
Article 1, Section 5 of the Constitution says “each House may determine the rules of its proceedings.” Apparently the 110th Congress has decided on no rules.
Among other committee assignments, Hastings serves as the Democrats’ Senior Member on the Committee on Rules and the Chairman of the Legislative & Budget Process Subcommittee. Louise Slaughter, author of the Slaughter Solution, is the Chairwoman of the House Committee on Rules.
— DRJ
I love it. It might turn out that Obama was the best thing that could have happened to this country right now. Incrementalism, such as we get from the the rinos, was the real enemy. These leftist parasites are going to wake normal Americans up and realize that we need to outlaw liberalism once and for all, by the same “by any means possible” means that the liberals are willing to use to destroy the country.
These are interesting times.
j curtis (5126e4) — 3/20/2010 @ 2:41 pmMost ethical (and intellectual) Democrat controlled Congress ever!
Steve G (7d4c78) — 3/20/2010 @ 2:41 pmSo true. To all the people who said, Oh what’s wrong with the government regulating X or Y, I say, look at this clip and you will see where it ends. In utter lawlessness. Tyranny.
Patricia (e1047e) — 3/20/2010 @ 2:49 pmWhat’s even worse is that Hastings, who was appointed as a federal judge in 1979 by Jimmy Carter, serves as a Democratic leader despite having been impeached for bribery and perjury.
DRJ (daa62a) — 3/20/2010 @ 2:54 pmI have as much contempt for Hastings as the next guy, but the very close cropping of that quote has me wondering what the context is.
Patterico (c218bd) — 3/20/2010 @ 3:10 pmWhat sucks is that Hastings is quite correct.
So long as a given bill bears the signature and imprimatur of the appropriate leadership in congress, a bill is ready for presidential endorsement or veto.
The one piece of clarity we did not get, thanks to the way the GOP fumbled the Stupak amendment months ago, is to once and for all identify the Dem semi-pro-lifers. Oh well.
The bottom line in all this is that this is as dark a day our Republic has known since 1812.
Ed from SFV (7f3244) — 3/20/2010 @ 3:13 pmHere’s a little more context from the Daily Caller but I don’t think it helps Hastings:
DRJ (daa62a) — 3/20/2010 @ 3:28 pmPat, can you think of a context where it *isn’t* reprehensible?
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 3/20/2010 @ 3:35 pmPat, can you think of a context where it *isn’t* reprehensible?
Sure. Lots of them.
But my innocent scenarios sound less likely given the somewhat fuller context DRJ provides in a comment above.
Patterico (c218bd) — 3/20/2010 @ 3:38 pmThe fact that Hastings is even a member of Congress is stain on the Democratic Party and the people of his district.
Some chump (c2555f) — 3/20/2010 @ 3:40 pmThe fact that Hastings is even a member of Congress is stain on the Democratic Party
Not to them. After all, since when has a large percentage of the left (which, naturally, dominates the Democrat Party) really given a damn about ethics, honesty and integrity? In their upside world, it’s far, far more important to display (or at least feign) compassion, generosity, tolerance, sophistication, self-esteem. And to embrace such motives even when the goal posts they’re based upon (ie, of what’s suitably compassionate or not) are constantly sliding back and forth.
Mark (411533) — 3/20/2010 @ 4:19 pmUm. Did any news report happen to mention Hastings’ criminality? I mean, since he is holding forth on honesty and ethicality and all? Silly question. The MSM defends the D!
Eric Blair (74653e) — 3/20/2010 @ 5:31 pmWell, Eric, there is a certain sense of fitting that the Democrats use a judge impeached from office for bribery for the “senior member” of the Rules committee.
SPQR (26be8b) — 3/20/2010 @ 5:54 pmThe stain is even worse when we remember that in 1988-1994, the Democrats were the majority party in both the House and Senate.
AD - RtR/OS! (cdee11) — 3/20/2010 @ 5:58 pmThey impeached and convicted this POS, and they own him in all his glory.
Once the House has returned to the Republicans, can they not eject Hastings, on the basis of his having been impeached? I know that the impeachment did not impose the “cannot serve” penalty, but just the same the Congress is the judge of its own members…
Kevin Murphy (3c3db0) — 3/20/2010 @ 7:21 pmI think we should all just refer to the sociopath as “Representative Hastings (D, Bribery and Corruption).”
That is the state in which he lives, so to speak.
Eric Blair (21af67) — 3/20/2010 @ 7:39 pm“Article 1, Section 5 of the Constitution says “each House may determine the rules of its proceedings.” Apparently the 110th Congress has decided on no rules.”
“Make them up as we go along” seems like they’re determining them.
imdw (de7003) — 3/20/2010 @ 8:36 pm“Make them up as we go along” seems like they’re determining them.
Comment by imdw — 3/20/2010 @ 8:36 pm
You’ve been around here too long to try to pass yourself off as someone who doesn’t understand English well enough to know what “Make them up as we go along” means.
L.N. Smithee (eb3307) — 3/20/2010 @ 8:53 pmimdw: Let me give you a clue as to what Alcee Hastings (D-Florida) meant: “Make [the rules] up as we go along” is what Democrats were doing in Florida in November 2000 — trying to create on the fly a method to get Al Gore to a lead in the Florida balloting, at which point they would insist on ending the recounting.
Those attempts failed in Florida, where Katherine Harris enforced the rules as they were written. But the strategy worked in Minnesota. Thus, Senator Al Franken (it still hurts to say that) and the filibuster proof majority that got us here.
L.N. Smithee (eb3307) — 3/20/2010 @ 9:01 pm“Let me give you a clue as to what Alcee Hastings (D-Florida) meant”
He’s on the rules committe. They make a rule and then it gets voted on. Apparently this is shocking news to people. I guess I watch too much CSPAN.
imdw (017d51) — 3/20/2010 @ 9:10 pmYou are so full of shit.
EW1(SG) (edc268) — 3/21/2010 @ 6:43 am“You are so full of shit.”
Look at the “house in session” post. They’re voting on a rule.
imdw (3ddf03) — 3/21/2010 @ 11:29 am[…] Hastings was right when he said Democrats are making up the rules as they go along. Obama was also right when he said he’s the transformative Change We Need. […]
Patterico's Pontifications » Democrats Have the Votes to Pass Health Care (e4ab32) — 3/21/2010 @ 12:46 pmThe use of the word “stain” in reference to anything or anyone african american is racist.
Maybe giving Marsha Conyers a public defender because she is “indigent” despite having a husband who is a congressperson making $175K will serve to relieve the sting.. I know that as a white male I feel better knowing the taxpayer is picking up her tab to make up for years and years of having to endure living in a racist amerikkka
Steve G (7d4c78) — 3/21/2010 @ 5:38 pm