Patterico's Pontifications

10/12/2015

Chris Wallace Says GOP Establishment Threatening to Primary Members Who Oppose Ryan

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 12:42 pm



This is the kind of tactic that so endears the GOP Establishment to small-government types:

CHRIS WALLACE: [T]here’s a lot of pressure being put on by the establishment and business groups, saying that some of those Freedom Caucus members, if you’re not going to play ball and you’re not going to get involved, you’re going to get a primary opponent.

Even if you support Ryan, I would hope you would disagree with this kind of thuggery.

116 Responses to “Chris Wallace Says GOP Establishment Threatening to Primary Members Who Oppose Ryan”

  1. Ding.

    Patterico (fecd9b)

  2. This is another example of the dangers of statism.

    Our problem continues to be career politicians.

    I don’t care for groups blackmailing groups.

    Eyes on the prize: making sure HRC isn’t President. Because the circular firing squad on the Right makes that increasingly likely.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  3. Politics is a dirty business. And the same establishment folks are being threatened too with either challengers or low voter turn out.

    Bottom line is the GOP needs the very people they despise to win, much like the Democrats need their welfare voters, so they can only pee in their mouths for so long.

    As I said, burn it down. All of it. The GOP as it exists does not deserve any support from its core constituency. Putting in a Bush or Clinton is two side of the same coin with Big Biz buying whatever they want and then scraps being flung from the table to appease their voters.

    So I prefer chaos in DC to the chaos they inflict on my family and I. Let them savage each other and take 10 Democrats with them in the process.

    Rodney King's Spirit (ab8c0d)

  4. I actually don’t have a problem with this as much as others here might. I frankly think that every incumbent politician should face a primary challenge every damn time he or she seeks reelection. I know that in the short run that hurts the chances for an easy reelection, but in the long run I think it leads to a more principled GOP. If the Chamber of Commerce types want to run a challenger to a Tea Party candidate that’s fine with me, just as I am equally fine with the Tea Party challenging a Chamber-backed candidate. At least then candidates have to go on record and explain to us their version of effective conservatism.

    JVW (ba78f9)

  5. this makes me not like paul ryan at all

    sleazy weirdo

    i’m voting for marsha i think

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  6. They might as well say they will primary everyone who opposes raising the debt ceiling or repealing ObamaCare. Maybe it will work for them or maybe it won’t — I can’t tell at this point — but at least it would be honest.

    DRJ (521990)

  7. I will vote for anyone but an endorsed CoC politician.

    Me (c0371d)

  8. Is the GOP establishment a greater threat to representative government than Islamic terrorism? Enquiring minds seek answers.

    ropelight (7e446e)

  9. Can the gop find a leader who opposes obamacare, amnesty, Irs used as a weapon, ruling by executive order? Ryan is not that guy.

    jim (a9b7c7)

  10. I’ll tell ya, Me, it’s a shame it’s come to that. I’m past president of my local C of C and I can tell you the local organizations are a world away from national. The most liberal folks at local level are usually the women entrepreneurs and they are at best moderate tending toward conservative. But then again, we don’t deal with multi-billion dollar multi-national corporation CEO’s, millionaire lobbyists, celebrities with a “cause”, or politicians cum activists (for money) like Gore or Clinton. The biggest pushing we do is get a new easement, a commercial variance or help a guy get his liquor license approved. Real heady stuff, indeed. But it’s important to the local businessman and his family and our community so it’s important to me.

    The national C of C gives us a bad name, but only among conservatives. The leftists love’em.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  11. #11 Yup.

    Rodney King's Spirit (ab8c0d)

  12. Chris Wallace is a leftist who voted for Obama twice. When you look at him think: Dan Rather.

    ropelight (7e446e)

  13. this hat is awesome

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  14. Our host posted above:

    Even if you support Ryan, I would hope you would disagree with this kind of thuggery.

    I have a different take on this, but it doesn’t have anything to do with Paul Ryan in particular.

    One man’s “thuggery” is another’s “political accountability.” Being faced with a threat of a primary opponent is something a member of Congress should welcome — and indeed, revel in, as proof he’s being effective in making the “right” enemies — if he’s convinced that he’s genuinely representing the wishes of his constituency. Incumbency is still a huge advantage even against a well-funded primary opponent. In general, I don’t need a very large violin when I’m playing dirge music for incumbents complaining about actually having to face a primary opponent.

    The more specifics I’ve heard about the Freedom Caucus’ procedural complaints and their proposed remedies, however, the less sympathetic I’ve become to the Freedom Caucus members, whoever they actually all are — as distinct from the many, many more members of the House who lost confidence in Boehner. In particular, the remedies these amorphous few are demanding will weaken the institution of the Speakership, regardless of whoever its next occupant(s) may be, and will change the historic power balance of the House in ways that I oppose. (Short version of why: I think they’ll make the House as ineffective as the Senate now is, further gutting Congressional power at the expense of the Executive at least through January 2017.)

    A great deal of what these people seem to be complaining about falls squarely within traditional carrot-and-stick powers of the Speakership. I don’t know whether Boehner was talented and fair in applying them or not; that’s not the reason I stopped supporting him; rather, I stopped supporting him because he hasn’t produced results or a prospect for results. But as I was listening to GOP members piss and whine about someone who’s voted against the party on a party-line vote being switched to a committee that didn’t fit that member’s training and education, I thought to myself: “These guys would paralyze the Congress and deliver a massive political windfall to Obama and the Dems over that petty nonsense?”

    Mostly they seem to want to be immunized from arm-twisting by the party leadership. I don’t support that.

    Traditionally, historically, in both chambers and on both sides of the aisles, Congressional leadership has quite frequently declared that certain votes, and certain matters, are to be considered “conscience votes.” The party leaders tell their members: “We recognize that there is good-faith disagreement about this, and that to be true to your principles on this important issue and to represent your constituents’ wishes, you may wish to depart from the recommendations we, the party leaders, have made. You may do so; please be civil, but be assured that as long as you are, there will be no retaliation against you for going against party discipline.”

    Votes for party leadership positions, by definition, are not conscience votes. They’re not typically done by secret ballot. The whole point is to put everyone on record as supporting, or not supporting, the particular candidate(s) for party leadership positions; it is absolutely essential to two-party democracy. And so yes: There are repercussions when you line up with or against other members. This ain’t beanbag.

    So if I disagree with one of these Freedom Caucus members, and disapprove, and think that member is being irresponsible, and that he ought to be replaced in Congress by someone with whom I agree better, and I send that potential primary opponent $25 to encourage him to run — am I thereby a thug?

    *****

    As I wrote on another thread: for very different reasons, everyone in the House, including Boehner, is now desperate to find a resolution here that permits Boehner to leave the Speakership at the end of October.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  15. I’m with JVW. I wish every incumbent would get primaried.

    nk (dbc370)

  16. And every recumbent voted out.

    nk (dbc370)

  17. The c of c has already stated they will be doubling down on money to defeat conservatives in the next election. Cantor,Boehner, McCarthy. Lmao. Your bullying tactics have run it’s course. Change parties you Roveaholics.

    mg (31009b)

  18. Amazing how the party discipline of which Beldar well speaks is rarely utilized to take on Obama and to defend the constitution.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  19. As far as I am concerned, the United States is now home to a one-party system, with far-left (Democrat) and near-left (GOPe) wings. To h*ll with the lot of ’em; let it burn.

    Rusty Bill (ad1f26)

  20. Amazing how the party discipline of which Beldar well speaks is rarely utilized to take on Obama and to defend the constitution.

    Exactly. All retribution seems to be saved for those who fight Obama.

    Patterico (fecd9b)

  21. Beldar wrote:

    “…I thought to myself: “These guys would paralyze the Congress and deliver a massive political windfall to Obama and the Dems over that petty nonsense?””

    Yes, the “Let It Burn” contingent think exactly that way. And once again, the Right complains about the Right doing what the Left wants by themselves doing what the Left wants.

    Sadly meta.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  22. The GOP leadership wants to be immune from arm-twisting by members, and it’s using the threat of primarying them as an cudgel to force the resistance to give in. So be it.

    But leadership wouldn’t have so many problems if it were competent and made an effort to support conservative policies. The GOP leadership’s problem is that it doesn’t want to do anything.

    DRJ (521990)

  23. Tell me, what would Ryan do as Speaker? Does anyone have a clue? No one does, and neither does he. That’s the point, isn’t it?

    DRJ (521990)

  24. The windfall to Obama is an opposing Party that always gives in. Obama is powerless when someone really stands up to him, as we see daily in foreign policy. The GOP ihas ben a gift to Obama for the past 7 years.

    DRJ (521990)

  25. The facts are the Roveaholics have been lying to the voters for years. Having survived being lied to for years from the boo shies, I sure as hell don’t need any more of their help. And they will be getting zero help from me Period. These are the most pompous a-holes going.

    mg (31009b)

  26. Romney tried to never offend anyone and look what happened. I think we should stop apologizing for conservatism and stand up for our beliefs and for people who espouse them. If that means a fight now and then, so what?

    If anyone here honestly thinks the path to a successful American political system comes through compromising with liberal socialists like Obama, then at least own it.

    DRJ (521990)

  27. #23… Yes, Simon, indeed the case. Stop the infighting and try to salvage what’s left of the country that the nincompoop-in-chief seems hell bent on destroying. Make no mistake, Obama is either wholly incompetent or knows exactly what he is doing. Either way, he’s not right… in the head.

    Colonel Haiku (0f4bb0)

  28. an opposing Party that always gives in

    worse than that they collaborated

    they stood by while the fascist IRS picked apart the Tea Party for them

    and they are still standing by

    Paul Ryan is the answer only if the question is please can we have more stagnation corruption and inertia

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  29. Good point, happyfeet.

    It’s not infighting that is the problem, Colonel, it’s that some of our teammates are collaborating with our opponents.

    DRJ (521990)

  30. … or simply have no desire to win. Didn’t they say that if we only gave them Congress, they would do something? Now they say it’s not enough and they need the Presidency, too. Frankly, I don’t believe them anymore.

    DRJ (521990)

  31. 15
    This hat is more awesome, Mr. Feets.

    If you insist on Edwardian headwear, watch the Derby scend in My Fair Lady.

    recumbent
    I like that word, nk.

    kishnevi (9cb6b5)

  32. @ Patterico (#22) & Ed from SFV (#20): These are fights about tactics to fight Obama, not whether to fight Obama. I don’t believe anyone involved is deliberately trying to help Obama. Do either of you really believe that?

    I respectfully submit that the several dozen bills passed through the House and currently sitting on Mitch McConnell’s desk were each and every one of them the result of GOP party discipline exercised by John Boehner and his deputies. The results are slim and insufficient; I’m in favor of putting party discipline into the hands of a new Speaker as part of a much larger responsibility to actually oppose Obama more effectively. But I see no grounds whatsoever to scrap the existing means of party discipline or to immunize members from consequences from their breaks with the Leadership — especially when they’ve banded with Democrats to do that.

    Freedom Caucus member Tom McClintock (R-CA) publicly resigned on September 16 because of his concerns that its members’ pursuit of their preferred tactics had become so shortsighted and selfish as to have become a boon to Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats. So the converse can certainly be argued, too.

    But I don’t think either argument is very productive. I’d like to get Boehner out now and get on with improving the poor showing of this Republican Congress. And I’m still waiting for anyone to advance a plausible scenario for how anyone other than Paul Ryan gets to 218 votes on the floor of the House before January.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  33. DRJ (#25): You ask if anyone has a clue what Ryan would do as Speaker?

    Ryan’s been in Congress since January 1999, and was an insider/staffer/speechwriter for many years before that. He’s been not just the chair of two of the House’s most important committees (Budget & now Ways & Means), but its principal architect of economic policies and ideas. He hasn’t been Speaker, and that’s a unique job. But we have a better basis to evaluate him, and to make intelligent predictions about how me might perform as Speaker, than we do about any of the other names that are being floated about, some of whom have been in Congress no more than two terms and who’ve never so much as held a committee chair.

    We do have a clue how Boehner will do if he continues as Speaker: Less well than he has been doing, because now he’s a self-made mostly-lame duck.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  34. I think Ryan should stay where he is. There are other people with the skills to be Speaker

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  35. Establishment republicans are as sickening as democrats. They have polished obama and his balls at every hole. How do these ingrates sleep at night? Booze and sleeping pills?

    mg (31009b)

  36. The house will do it’s best work with no speaker.

    mg (31009b)

  37. It’s not infighting that is the problem, Colonel, it’s that some of our teammates are collaborating with our opponents.

    DRJ (521990) — 10/12/2015 @ 4:14 pm

    and others who believe they are fighting the good fight are unwittingly doing the same… throwing the baby out with the bath water, DRJ.

    Colonel Haiku (0f4bb0)

  38. Hmmm… I’ve never run across a blue stat-based, leftwing troll who chose the name goober. Times they are a changin’…

    Colonel Haiku (0f4bb0)

  39. Why is a threat of a primary thuggery? When they went after Cantor, was that thuggery?

    One person’s thug is another person’s patriot.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  40. Paul Ryan was once a shinning conservative light, but he was apprenticed by Darth McVain and seduced by the Dark Side of the GOPe. If Ryan becomes Speaker he’ll push for comprehensive amnesty to guarantee the fat cats with low wage labor and stick the taxpayers with all the bills for collateral damage.

    ropelight (7e446e)

  41. because they have the money and the media outlets, then they demand that we fall in line, behind their choices, because one day, they will do something to affirm conservatism,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  42. And there were the notable primaries against Lugar, McConnell and Cochran, by nos chouchous du moment.

    nk (dbc370)

  43. yes, and we saw how diplomatically they handled those,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  44. It would be an interesting alternate history that Aaron Burr had not made himself into a pariah by killing Hamilton and had remained a force in the political foundations of the country. Would we still be stuck with the same mopery? But like Buddha said, it is what it is.

    nk (dbc370)

  45. well he’s one alternate path,

    In the alternate history short story, “The War of ’07” by Jayge Carr, collected in the anthology Alternate Presidents, Burr is elected President over Thomas Jefferson in 1800, establishes an alliance with Napoleon Bonaparte, and creates a family dictatorship. He serves as president for a total of nine terms. Upon his death in 1836, he is succeeded by his grandson Aaron Burr Alston, who previously served as his Vice President.[81]

    narciso (ee1f88)

  46. Beldar,

    If we judge Ryan by his past interests, he will focus on entitlements and the details of the budget. Entitlements would be a disaster for a GOP Cogres in a Presidential electionary year. We might as well do a commercial showing Ryan pushing Grandma off the cliff himself, instead of a surrogate chosen by the Democrafs.

    Of course, Ryan is a budget man and the House should prepare a budget, but Ryan specializes in big budget proposals. What the House needs to do is separate budgets proposed in regular order (as the Freedom Caucus wants), not the last minute “crisis” big budget proposals that we’ve seen in the past two terms. Bless him for caring about the details. That makes him a perfect fit for Ways and Means.

    DRJ (521990)

  47. By the way, Beldar, I do believe some Republican leaders want to help Obama protect his policies. They want immigration reform aka amnesty, and they wanted the Obama Administration to succeed on social issues like SSM, and they want to see the Tea Party undermined – and having the Democrats do it for them is icing on their cake. They care about protecting incumbents far more than they care about fighting for a conservative agenda.

    DRJ (521990)

  48. they don’t deserve icing

    they’re frauds and cowards

    happyfeet (831175)

  49. I hope some conservative house member writes a tell all about how traitorous the republican house leadership have become.

    mg (31009b)

  50. Paul Ryan could be the ultimate veneer republican.

    mg (31009b)

  51. If I can survive years of deceit from my own team, I sure as hell can survive life with Bernie. Fluck off republicans.

    mg (31009b)

  52. And Paul Ryan seems to have no problem with this and that is the reason he would make a terrible Speaker and that he supports the VichyGOP establishment more than the Constitution.

    They all need to go. It is time to take back the House and send the establishment out to pasture.

    There is no substitute for victory or liberty.

    WarEagle82 (44dbd0)

  53. I posted this on another thread by mistake.

    This is why Ryan is not a good choice for Speaker.

    DRJ (521990)

  54. well he starts off well, then moves on to ‘burning strawmen’ going back to 1928, I’d settle for 1988,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  55. so, narcisco, let me get this straight.

    They don’t do what our group of citizens wants, we threaten to primary them and that’s heroism. Because we’re the good guys.

    They don’t do what some other group of citizens wants, and they threaten primaries, and they’re thugs. Because they aren’t us.

    Got it.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  56. My God but the circular firing squad organizes fast. Their crime? In our fever dreams they don;’t do exactly what our rump caucus wants exactly when we want it.

    Are you effing crazy?

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  57. maybe if they told they were going to follow the Chamber of Commerce rulebook, we could give up and it would be 2006 again, Hastert augered the party into the ground, they permitted Texas for Justice to take Delay out, they dropped the ball in 2008, and came up with the Jones Memo, to hide the details,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  58. OF course, DRJ is saying what I said last week about Ryan. His heart isn’t in it, and he’d have to abandon (or delegate) his entitlement reform in order to do the Speaker job right.

    On the other hand, he does have something he wants to do, as opposed to Boehner who just knew what he didn’t want to do.

    Ryan is right at the core of the current GOP. That’s what you’re going to get. Only crazy people think that a 30-member caucus is going to call the shots. They can call some, if they ask nicely, but that’s about it.

    Don’t like that? Form the actual Tea Party, leave the GOP caucus, and run for re-election on the Tea Party line. But don’t claim to be Republicans, then go against the Party.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  59. narcisco —

    Just because you disagree with them, that does not make their tactics thuggish.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  60. I think Ryan should stay where he is. There are other people with the skills to be Speaker

    Name three who can get more than 50 votes. That’s the problem. Now, I think Ryan would be a fool to take the job — they should bring in an interim speaker from outside.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  61. DRJ, I notice that Peter Spiliakos, in the National Review Corner post you linked, also failed to present any alternative to Ryan, or any plausible path or timetable for anyone else to succeed Boehner.

    That puts him in the same boat as all the Ryan opponents in these comments, doesn’t it?

    I think I’ve said all I have to say for now.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  62. lets see how it shakes out, we aren’t facing ragnarok next week, are we,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  63. Republican leaders should also have enough respect for their own voters to know that they Ryan brand won’t lull Republican voters into forgetting about the fissures within the center-right coalition.

    This. The problem is that GOP leaders don’t respect their own voters,nor do they care about any substantive disagreements which have led up to the divide in the party, other than to shut it down. They don’t care, and worse, see the way to regain control is to bring the conservative faction to heel. they know Ryan is more effective where he is. More of the same crap.

    Dana (86e864)

  64. 22

    Exactly. All retribution seems to be saved for those who fight Obama.

    Bob Bennett lost a primary to Mike Lee.

    Richard Lugar lost a primary to Richard Mourdock.

    Eric Cantor lost a primary to Dave Brat.

    James B. Shearer (d06656)

  65. Romney tried to never offend anyone and look what happened. I think we should stop apologizing for conservatism and stand up for our beliefs and for people who espouse them. If that means a fight now and then, so what?

    And it cannot be stated too much that to have been a conservative over 60 years ago — when the middle of the socio-economic spectrum leaned to the right — was one thing. But, now, to be anything less than of the right — when the middle of the ideological scale has tilted quite a bit to the left — is a whole different matter.

    In turn, to be a liberal or even a so-called moderate in the America of scroungy Democrat characters like Barack and Hillary is to be quite leftwing by the standards of over 60 years ago.

    The slippery slope that ultra-conservatives (eg, John Birchers) were warning about decades ago, and which would have sounded alarmist and inflammatory in the context of a society far removed from today’s “Goddamn America!” — has become the unflattering reality of 2015.

    Mark (f713e4)

  66. yes, we get one shot in the cycle, maybe two with Paul, then they go after any other prospective candidates,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  67. These are the most pompous a-holes going.

    said the person with no sense of irony or self-image.

    redc1c4 (0f6605)

  68. Frum’s a bum, and then some!

    Gazzer (7baf28)

  69. I support the Tea Party Republicans, but there’s nothing thuggish about what the CoC is doing. When you can’t get your policies enacted, you try to replace the politicians who won’t do what you want. That’s just how a Republic works.

    Cugel (9d8262)

  70. Meanwhile, California passes Motor-Voter-for-Illegals bill, Brown signs it.

    The first thing the GOP Congress ought to propose is a law against conspiracy by government officials to shelter persons illegally present, making it a felony to conspire to offer any government assistance or benefit to illegal aliens, except for public school education, emergency medical care, and public safety services.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  71. Kevin. At what point, does the war begin???
    At what juncture of MARXIST/LIBTARD cognitive dissonance, does the first volley occur???

    GUS (7cc192)

  72. Bring it on you pompous a-hole republicans, you will never win the presidential elections with the traitorous crew you have running.
    Lmao at all you thugs. Lock and load republicans your about to be toast. It is all over for you boorish pricks.

    mg (31009b)

  73. How long until rino ryan has us speaking spanish?

    mg (31009b)

  74. Ryan is nothing but a career liar. A perfect fit for republicans.

    mg (31009b)

  75. Beldar – the issue is that the Party refuses to actually fight against the rapid erosion of our republic. The single most important thing for any group or individual is to correctly and smartly choose which, if any, fights are necessary.

    It is entirely galling to me that the Party has almost always chosen the wrong fight – a fight against its own who want to fight the correct fights.

    Whether by want or by practical effect, Obama wins thanks to such feckless and perverted leadership which aims more at its own, than he.

    Ed from SFV (3400a5)

  76. You’re right, Kevin M and Beldar. Enjoy your Party. I’m done.

    DRJ (521990)

  77. Also, it’s not about deciding who the “perfect” Speaker would be. We all have our favorites but any member can decide to run for Speaker, and it’s up to Congress to decide who should win. There needs to be a competition. The GOP cares far too much about agreement and not enough about winning.

    DRJ (521990)

  78. I don’t have a problem if the GOP wants more moderates. However, doesn’t it make more sense to use that $100M to attract and support candidates to run against Democrats? That’s where the moderate votes are.

    The GOP should try to get bigger, not start eating its own. Even if Tea Party people like me are annoying, we’re stI’ll more conservative than Democrats. But the GOP’s choice is clear — they want a little moderate tent, even if it means they never win another Presidency.

    DRJ (521990)

  79. They always tout Goldwater when wilkie, Dewey and ford, didn’t make it either

    narciso (ee1f88)

  80. When the shooting starts I’m targeting Republicans first. Rocks, teeth and busted furniture will have to suffice for the aliens.

    DNF (4a9f41)

  81. No, that is what they do, we haven’t the resources.

    narciso (ee1f88)

  82. There won’t be a revolution. Just a collapse from the dry rot and scavengers, imported and domestic, picking through it.

    nk (dbc370)

  83. nk is right. They don’t have the balls for an actual revolution just a good old fashion riot. But with raping and some shooting thrown in since the cops will be busy protecting their own families.

    Rev. Barack Hussein Hoagie™ (f4eb27)

  84. Look to the country south of us or nations similar to France to get a sense of what the US may be like in upcoming years. Just a lot of never-ending, mind-numbing shades of liberalism mixed with lots of corruption, greedy government agencies and bureaucrats, no shortage of crime, and a sheeple populace dumbed down by a defiled culture, perhaps where (as is true in France) a large percentage of younger people peg their career goals to being part of the civil service.

    Vive le France, vive le Mexico!

    Mark (f713e4)

  85. Stopped giving money to the GOP in 2012, choosing to donate directly to those candidates who actually stood by conservative principles. The GOPe, in my opinion, are worse than the leftists.
    What insane Obama policies have been stopped, overturned or even slowed down since we voters gave the GOP control of both houses of congress?

    I have even stridently talked my children out of joining the military. I served 25 years, but I will be damned if I want my kids thrown into the SJW daycare mentality of the military that the slime of the left has forced upon us.

    C of C wants to primary conservatives? OK. Boycott all businesses that support the C of C, form a new business advocacy group that supports American exceptionalism and true conservative economic policies. Publicly denounce the C of C and any candidate who is endorsed by them.

    Continuing to support the GOPe, which lies worse than a serial philanderer telling his long suffering wife the lipstick on his shirt is not really lipstick at all, but smudged ketchup from the cheeseburger he ate on the way home from another late night at the office, is even worse than the lower class folks addicted to welfare continuing to support the leftist political plantation owners.

    Either the GOP actively defends the Constitution on principle against the leftist penchant for totalitarianism, or it follows the Whig party into the dustbin of history.

    Pete (012f45)

  86. narciso (ee1f88) — 10/12/2015 @ 9:09 pm

    Given that the vast majority of Holocaust victims (and Nazi victims in general) were not under German rule until September 1939 or later, talking about German gun laws is missing the point in and of itself. It would be better to talk about gun laws in France, Poland, and the Soviet Union (strict, I assume in the latter, but I don’t have any data at hand). And also the history of Jewish partisans in the years 1939-45, which isn’t exactly encouraging as an example of civilians defending themselves against a totalitarian government.

    kishnevi (870883)

  87. In the interests of fairness I don’t see any difference between sides both of which “primary” the other. The more conservative wing has been doing this for a while now so I can’t see why there is shock that the establishment may begin to do the same.

    By the way I’d like to see that gal from Tennessee get the speaker’s chair

    Mark Johnson (f7ada4)

  88. The interests of the businesses and chamber of Commerce aren’t necessarily the interests of the Republican party or the nation. These big business donors want cheap labor, therefore they want amnesty and tech visas. The American people despise both. And what the GOP establishment doesn’t understand is that, in this day and age, they don’t need the big donors, they can go directly to the people. It’s better to have a million people send you ten dollars apiece than it is to have one donor give your pac ten million dollars. Same money and those million people who sent you ten dollars represent a million potential supporters.

    Mike Giles (dc401c)

  89. If there were a third party based on Constitutional principles, honesty, morality, and freedom from government here in Iowa, I’d join it. I am tired of the losers the Iowa Establishment runs for office.

    PCD (39058b)

  90. @ DRJ (#82), re this:

    It’s not about deciding who the “perfect” Speaker would be. We all have our favorites but any member can decide to run for Speaker, and it’s up to Congress to decide who should win. There needs to be a competition.

    I don’t disagree, in general. But as is my frustrating wont, I quibble. Bear with me, friend, and forgive me if I’m merely stating what’s already obvious to you.

    I definitely agree that it’s interesting, but unproductive, to invest much energy in arguing about who the “perfect Speaker” would be, especially since (as these comments and the ongoing national discussion have shown) the potential candidates aren’t even limited to the 435 current members of the House. Discussing the “perfect” is entertaining and fanciful, but productive only for those purposes (entertainment); it’s like arguing over whether Sandy Koufax could have struck out Babe Ruth.

    Somewhat more interesting and productive is the topic of who, among the current GOP House members, we think might be the “best” Speaker, and — as part of that same inquiry — how we might each rank our lists of preferred candidates. I’ve enjoyed, and learned from, your and others’ comments on that topic.

    Both of those are different questions, though, from who, as a practical matter in the real world, can actually become Speaker, if Boehner actually steps down. And that is the exact question that interests me most of all.

    I agree that there needs to be a competition! I submit that indeed, there is one — but it’s not the kind of competition most of us think about. Normally when we think of intra-party election competitions, we imagine the proverbial smoke-filled rooms (are they now vape-filled, I wonder?), and/or we imagine wave after wave of successive ballots, winnowing the lowest vote-getter off after each round, until someone finally noses above 50%.

    The nature of this competition, though, comes straight from the Constitution as one of our most fundamental structures of government. Article One, Section Two, specifies that “The House of Representatives shall choose their speaker and other officers.” As a consequence, a Speaker candidate getting even a two-thirds supermajority of the GOP membership can’t thereby end the competition. Because the Speaker must be chosen by the whole House, he must get a majority of it — 218.

    That structural feature of Congress defines this particular intra-party competition, but no others. So this particular intra-party decision necessarily has to end in a wide consensus — something approaching acclamation among all GOP members (unless Dem votes are to be enlisted). Failing a candidate who can get to 218 on the floor of the House (not in the GOP Caucus), then Boehner is Speaker until the end of this Congress in January 2017.

    So it’s the structural constraint on this particular competition — via the constitutional requirement of a majority of all members (regardless of party) instead of even a large supermajority of the majority party — that is being exploited by the Freedom Caucus. Without it, they’d have no leverage at all, and the other 5/6ths of the GOP House would pick a new Speaker.

    And in particular, the fact that this is a mid-term selection creates further limits to the amount of competition that there’s time to actually play out.

    These circumstances of Constitution and calendar are what prompt some people to suggest an “interim” or “caretaker” Speaker. Okay. We all know where that would end up, don’t we? Whoever is brought in as a caretaker now will, come 2017, be known as the “sacrificial goat” — the short-lived Speaker whose main purpose was to grease the skids for a series of quick and unfavorable deals with the Obama Administration between now and Election Day 2016. I can think of no surer prescription for disaster.

    *****

    A last thought, for now:

    It’s intensely comical to me to see the chasm between, on the one hand, the very nasty and categorical slurs hurled at Ryan by the Freedom Caucus’ public supporters (here & elsewhere) and, on the other hand, the Caucus members’ own universally respectful public statements about Ryan.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  91. Actually, the Freedom Caucus’ own pick (before McCarthy stepped down), Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL), would probably also be no more than a caretaker speaker: Unless he can get it reversed, a Florida court decision has re-drawn his district out from under him, and he’ll lose his seat in the next Congress.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  92. That last is well put, Beldar. I really don’t like the silly name calling. Never have. I’m glad the FC doesn’t stoop that kind of behavior. Disagree with a candidate, sure. But the juvenile name calling is not good, for all kinds of reasons.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  93. All the nasty quotes about conservatives over the years stated by team republican now want it to stop and want the conservatives to be quiet and do what they are told. Some of us will hold on to our core beliefs and fight the fight, others will compromise and get their wing tips polished.
    Got it.

    mg (31009b)

  94. he’s the chairman of the ways and means committee

    you have to pretend to like him

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  95. Yes, Mr. Feet (#99), but: Those same individuals have been markedly more effusive in expressing their respect and admiration for Ryan than they have been for Boehner. I think it’s genuine respect.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  96. i’d agree with that

    he’s a good egg when he stays in his lane

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  97. Beldar,

    I think the House is like a powderkeg and some people are trying very hard to keep it from publicly blowing up by naming Ryan as Speaker by agReem entry or perhaps even by acclamation. I think doing that almost guarantees more problems in the future.

    I also think Ryan is a detail person and the Speaker needs to focus on the big picture, but it’s fine with me if the people who know him feel his reputation mstters more than his skills. Overall, I don’t care who they choose but if they continue to act like a secret society operating behind closed doors – while simultaneously leaking stories about getting even with members who don’t toe the line – then I agree whoever is named Speaker is destined to fail.

    The closest analogy I can think of would be if, in 2007, Democratic leaders had chosen between Hillary and Obama behind closed doors instead of letting them fight it out in the primaries. Even if they had chosen Obama, the Hillary supporters’ dissatisfaction would have destroyed the Party.

    Ryan is an honorable, intelligent and decent man. I know you like him and are sensitive to negative comments about him, but there has been name-calling by both sides. I think that’s the nature of the political process and probably always will be.

    DRJ (521990)

  98. I look better than Ryan with our shirts off and bags over our heads.

    DNF (5cc224)

  99. i think name-calling is an extraordinarily wonderful american political tradition, and even more so at a time when we’re plagued with so many extraordinarily execrable politicians who’ve personally prospered during a time of precipitous national decline in so many different spheres

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  100. Gosh, but you folks sure are tough. Some of you even vote.

    Oh, yeah.

    Best part? You claim to hate the Left and show it by serving their purposes.

    And then prattle on about burning things down.

    Great job.

    Simon Jester (c0506d)

  101. i’m hangin tough like a new kid

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  102. Heck, I remember when you tough guys insisted Romney was “no different” than Obama.

    Yep, foreign policy sure showed you purity types to be right.

    Great job. I cannot believe this nonsense.

    Let it burn. That includes my kids.

    But please. Continue that strategy.

    See you in the bread lines.

    Simon Jester (c0506d)

  103. don’t like Romney he’s a big weirdo

    a big unelectable weirdo

    just like how Meghan’s coward daddy was

    i tried to warn everybody but they didn’t listen

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  104. i have links

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  105. Iza be grown the wheat, baken the bread and passin it out in the lines.
    Just like my Grandfather.

    mg (31009b)

  106. me too I’m a grow some wheat

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  107. I still have the Copper Clad wood cook stove grandma used to bake it in.

    mg (31009b)

  108. here in chicago if it’s got copper in it you gotta lock it up

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  109. 95

    … So this particular intra-party decision necessarily has to end in a wide consensus …

    Only because the Republicans have no party discipline. The normal procedure is the majority party picks a leader in a caucus among themselves and then the entire party is expected to vote for the winner.

    By refusing to abide by majority party decisions the Freedom Caucus has effectively formed a new party. So you have 188 Democrats, about 207 Republicans and about 40 Freedom Caucus members. So as in a parliamentary system you would need a coalition between 2 of the 3 parties for a majority. The natural coalition would be between the Republicans and the Freedom Caucus. In such cases it is common for the smaller party in a coalition to obtain some concessions but there is no way it would have more say than the larger party (which out numbers it 5 to 1) in the coalition. So the Freedom Caucus just has nuisance value it can’t actually accomplish much.

    James B. Shearer (d06656)

  110. Porky Rove and his litter of republican pigs are going down.
    http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/10/the_gop_establishments_war_with_it_base.html

    mg (31009b)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1334 secs.