Marjorie Taylor Greene calls for new speaker ahead of spending deal vote

[libertybele]

Right  - But it does Conservatives no good to be so complacent as to make no way.  I think you're right. They take it too far. But they have to try to move the needle too. And I applaud that standing.

If Conservatives don't move that needle to get border security the GOP will lose their party and we lose our country.  That's not a theory, it's fast becoming a fact.  Those in office can either fight for conservatism or keep letting liberalism work. Gee, fighting for conservatism; what a concept.  They may lose this fight but it is a fight worth fighting.

Liberalism hasn't worked in the past, sure as heck isn't working now and will collapse this country sooner rather than later.

[roamer_1]

I don't applaud stupid moves even if the motive and intent is pure.  Idiocy kills you just as quickly as bad intentions.

If you want a more conservative House GOP, elect more conservatives.  . But acting as if you have a majority that you don't, and engaging in actions that are sure not only to fail, but to make you even worse off what you were before, is a sure way to discredit conservatives, and elect fewer.

I am so sick of these morons that I'm not even going to vote for the Moreno, the MAGA senatorial nominee in Ohio.  My tolerance for stupid people is at an end.

Oh I don't know... It sounds to me like they are building majority. He went against the majority of his party to bull this damn thing through. At what price? Now, I am not so knee-jerk as to be automatically pissed at that. I know how sausage is made. But one thing is sure - If they cannot come to terms in an election year, of all times, then the party may as well be defunct. It is without a pair of cajones in the entire conference, and may as well bend over for the Democrats.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Perhaps that's what's needed.

No, what is needed is very simple: elect more conservatives.The freedom caucus needs to grow the f*** up.  Jim Jordan, their preferred candidate, got to run for the Speakership.  Twice.  And he lost. Twice.   MKG and others believing they are entitled to force the guy who did win the speaker ship to act as if he was Jim Jordan is juvenile.  It's not how coalitions work, and other House Republicans are going to remember this in the future when it comes to trying to work with those conservatives.

What makes this so infuriating is that it isn't going to make a difference anyway. Regardless of whether or not they managed to remove Johnson as Speaker, that bill is going to pass. Nor are more conservative votes going to flutter down into Congress for the remainder of this session to force legislation for the rest of the year to the right. It isn't going to happen. So what we have is a purely symbolic battle, doomed to defeat right from the start, that does nothing but discredit Republicans, and especially conservatives by extension. It's a horrifically stupid own goal.

[roamer_1]

If Conservatives don't move that needle to get border security the GOP will lose their party and we lose our country.  That's not a theory, it's fast becoming a fact.  Those in office can either fight for conservatism or keep letting liberalism work. Gee, fighting for conservatism; what a concept.  They may lose this fight but it is a fight worth fighting.

Liberalism hasn't worked in the past, sure as heck isn't working now and will collapse this country sooner rather than later.

Yes to all of that, but with less emphasis. One has to allow time to bear fruit, even when there seems to be no time. It takes time. being so recalcitrant as to accept no quarter is a posture ill suited to any agreement. Skin in the game, for sure. Move the needle for sure. But it's a fine line to walk and still keep a voting coalition. 'My way or the highway' and that 'right damn now' might be a wee bit too strong.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

But one thing is sure - If they cannot come to terms in an election year, of all times, then the party may as well be defunct. It is without a pair of cajones in the entire conference, and may as well bend over for the Democrats.

First, it isn't a question of cajones. The issue is repeatedly and erroneously cast as"Republicans" not being tough enough. That isn't the problem at all. The problem is that you have a sufficient minority of Republicans in Congress who are not conservatives.  If anything, those moderates have too much cojones, and refuse just to go along meekly with bullying by a conservative minorityy.  The GOP is a coalition - it is not a singular group of like-minded individuals.

Now, if conservatives decide that they no longer want to be part of a coalition, then they might as well break away and form their own party. Of course, if there aren't enough conservatives to elect a majority within the Republican party, then there is zero chance that there are enough conservatives to outvote the Democrats all by themselves.

Second, the content of that coalition changes with each election, and just because this particular election did not result in enough conservatives getting elected is no reason to stamp our feet, throw a tantrum, and whine that it can never happen.  It just didn't happen this past election.

And third, the fact that this is an election year with the opportunity to change the composition of Congress so that it is more in our favor is an argument against this kind of stunt. The Democrats are handing us election issues by the bushel, and our response is stunts that accomplish nothing other than to demonstrate Republicans can't govern.

Honestly, I'm starting to see a lot of merit in the Democrats' claim that we are the party of the stupid people.

[roamer_1]

No, what is needed is very simple: elect more conservatives.The freedom caucus needs to grow the f*** up.  Jim Jordan, their preferred candidate, got to run for the Speakership.  Twice.  And he lost. Twice.   MKG and others believing they are entitled to force the guy who did win the speaker ship to act as if he was Jim Jordan is juvenile.  It's not how coalitions work, and other House Republicans are going to remember this in the future when it comes to trying to work with those conservatives.

What makes this so infuriating is that it isn't going to make a difference anyway. Regardless of whether or not they managed to remove Johnson as Speaker, that bill is going to pass. Nor are more conservative votes going to flutter down into Congress for the remainder of this session to force legislation for the rest of the year to the right. It isn't going to happen. So what we have is a purely symbolic battle, doomed to defeat right from the start, that does nothing but discredit Republicans, and especially conservatives by extension. It's a horrifically stupid own goal.

Hold on. 112 stood with THEM. 102 stood with the speaker. Within the conference, he lost. That's fair leverage. But according to you the 112 should cave to the 102. WTF, man?

Now, I get that it ain't  A LOT of leverage... But you don't lay down either.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Hold on. 112 stood with THEM. 102 stood with the speaker. Within the conference, he lost. That's fair leverage. But according to you the 112 should cave to the 102. WTF, man?

Now, I get that it ain't  A LOT of leverage... But you don't lay down either.

No, the 112 don't have to cave to the 102.  They are perfectly free to vote against the bill.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I'm just going to add one thing, and then I'll leave the thread before I get even more obnoxious than I already am.

FWIW, I don't think Johnson likes this bill either. But what he's thinking about is the fact that this election was trending in our direction on a bunch of issues, and he doesn't want to hand the Democrats an easy and effective campaign issue by handing them a shutdown that is sure to fail anyway.

There is zero chance - zero - that the Democrats would be unable to get a handful of RINO's to cross the aisle to avoid that shutdown.  The Senate GOP caving guaranteed that.  So, the Democrat victory in getting that bill passed is assured. The only question is whether that bill will pass after a pointless 30-day shutdown while the discharge petition chugs through, or whether it passes now.

Johnson has decided that there is no political gain for Republicans in shutting down the government for 30 days only to end up exactly in the same place they'd be anyway.  And not only does he believe there's no gain, but he believes that handing the Democrats that kind of issue will damage the Republican chances of holding on to the House in November..

I don't believe in fighting battles you can't win if they put you in an even worse place than you were before, and neither does Johnson.  It might have been a completely different story if the Senate Republicans had managed to stop this thing, but they didn't. And enough of them supported it to give the Democratic claims of bipartisanship some merit.

[roamer_1]

First, it isn't a question of cajones. The issue is repeatedly and erroneously cast as"Republicans" not being tough enough. That isn't the problem at all. The problem is that you have a sufficient minority of Republicans in Congress who are not conservatives.  If anything, those moderates have too much cojones, and refuse just to go along meekly with bullying by a conservative minorityy.  The GOP is a coalition - it is not a singular group of like-minded individuals.

Right. So Gang-of-Eight all over again. But when Conservatives grow a pair and stand up against the minority in the middle, you're accusing THEM? C'mon. I know it's a pretty even split. And I know it can't be full throttle... I think they're wrong in that. But I think they need to go home wih the goods. Some goods. Real goods. Otherwise the middle is always going to rule, and always set the tone. And in that, the Conservatives remain in the gutter.

NOW, Conservatives are setting the tone. And the conference AGREES with THEM, albeit only because it is an election year... But the middlin speaker THROWS the deal and acts with the middle which was not a majority of the conference.

In part, I get that. The deal has an expiration date and he's trying to move forward with what he can.  And yeah, they are being too insistent in the face of a razor thin majority, both in conference and generally. But surely neither side - NEITHER SIDE (of the conference I mean) - is acting in good faith.

You blame the right for not moving. And I'll agree. But what did the middle move on?

Now, if conservatives decide that they no longer want to be part of a coalition, then they might as well break away and form their own party. Of course, if there aren't enough conservatives to elect a majority within the Republican party, then there is zero chance that there are enough conservatives to outvote the Democrats all by themselves.

What difference in that if there is never a win? They may as well be by themselves. Where is the profit in coalition from the Conservative side? A promise ten years from now?

Second, the content of that coalition changes with each election, and just because this particular election did not result in enough conservatives getting elected is no reason to stamp our feet, throw a tantrum, and whine that it can never happen.  It just didn't happen this past election.

True. At least in spirit. But not in the application. Three times in my life Conservatives have moved the needle. And that, each time, destroyed by their own conference in the next or following sessions. Read that. Their OWN betrayed them. Not the Democrats. Again, what profit?

So hard ball it is. If the RINOs want to side with the Democrats so be it. Let the voters sort it out.

And third, the fact that this is an election year with the opportunity to change the composition of Congress so that it is more in our favor is an argument against this kind of stunt. The Democrats are handing us election issues by the bushel, and our response is stunts that accomplish nothing other than to demonstrate Republicans can't govern.

Honestly, I'm starting to see a lot of merit in the Democrats' claim that we are the party of the stupid people.

Standing in opposition to 'what the Democrats are offering by the bushel' is the name of the game. Folding up and letting them do it is the Republican norm. I'll stand with the hot blood in that.

[roamer_1]

No, the 112 don't have to cave to the 102.  They are perfectly free to vote against the bill.

Sure they are. The bill that should have stayed in conference until the Republicans weren't split, and you know it.

[roamer_1]

I'm just going to add one thing, and then I'll leave the thread before I get even more obnoxious than I already am.

Are you being obnoxious? I hadn't noticed.

FWIW, I don't think Johnson likes this bill either. But what he's thinking about is the fact that this election was trending in our direction on a bunch of issues, and he doesn't want to hand the Democrats an easy and effective campaign issue by handing them a shutdown that is sure to fail anyway.

There is zero chance - zero - that the Democrats would be unable to get a handful of RINO's to cross the aisle to avoid that shutdown.  The Senate GOP caving guaranteed that.  So, the Democrat victory in getting that bill passed is assured. The only question is whether that bill will pass after a pointless 30-day shutdown while the discharge petition chugs through, or whether it passes now.

Johnson has decided that there is no political gain for Republicans in shutting down the government for 30 days only to end up exactly in the same place they'd be anyway.  And not only does he believe there's no gain, but he believes that handing the Democrats that kind of issue will damage the Republican chances of holding on to the House in November..

I don't believe in fighting battles you can't win if they put you in an even worse place than you were before, and neither does Johnson.  It might have been a completely different story if the Senate Republicans had managed to stop this thing, but they didn't. And enough of them supported it to give the Democratic claims of bipartisanship some merit.

I get all that... and at least, I alluded to it. I can commiserate. The only option  otherwise then is to let the Gang of Eight run the show, as they always do. That has always been the secret to the Moderate wing's success.

As for me, I see a dire need to break the Moderate's power. And even if ham-handed, the Conservatives have FINALLY got a wedge in. I am all for that. *ALL FOR IT*. If for no other reason than to make them bastards miserable for a change.

The margin - at least on this deal - was pretty even in-conference. That, if it were you and me, would imply some sort of brokered power sharing - a brokered participation in cobbling the deal to stand against the Democrats as an actual participatory coalition. Not just a Moderate flex YET AGAIN, wielding the power of the chair.

I cry bullshit. and I stand with the Conservatives, even though they are being too insistent by half. Better that than to fold like the typical Republican p***ies and let the Democrats have their way. Even if the Democrats have their way. At least they won't be numbered with the RINOs that let it happen. AGAIN.

[DCPatriot]

I'm just going to add one thing, and then I'll leave the thread before I get even more obnoxious than I already am.

FWIW, I don't think Johnson likes this bill either. But what he's thinking about is the fact that this election was trending in our direction on a bunch of issues, and he doesn't want to hand the Democrats an easy and effective campaign issue by handing them a shutdown that is sure to fail anyway.

good stuff...  @Maj. Bill Martin   

There is zero chance - zero - that the Democrats would be unable to get a handful of RINO's to cross the aisle to avoid that shutdown.  The Senate GOP caving guaranteed that.  So, the Democrat victory in getting that bill passed is assured. The only question is whether that bill will pass after a pointless 30-day shutdown while the discharge petition chugs through, or whether it passes now.

Johnson has decided that there is no political gain for Republicans in shutting down the government for 30 days only to end up exactly in the same place they'd be anyway.  And not only does he believe there's no gain, but he believes that handing the Democrats that kind of issue will damage the Republican chances of holding on to the House in November..

I don't believe in fighting battles you can't win if they put you in an even worse place than you were before, and neither does Johnson.  It might have been a completely different story if the Senate Republicans had managed to stop this thing, but they didn't. And enough of them supported it to give the Democratic claims of bipartisanship some merit.

Cognitive dissonance much??   /s   

[libertybele]

Right. So Gang-of-Eight all over again. But when Conservatives grow a pair and stand up against the minority in the middle, you're accusing THEM? C'mon. I know it's a pretty even split. And I know it can't be full throttle... I think they're wrong in that. But I think they need to go home wih the goods. Some goods. Real goods. Otherwise the middle is always going to rule, and always set the tone. And in that, the Conservatives remain in the gutter.

NOW, Conservatives are setting the tone. And the conference AGREES with THEM, albeit only because it is an election year... But the middlin speaker THROWS the deal and acts with the middle which was not a majority of the conference.

In part, I get that. The deal has an expiration date and he's trying to move forward with what he can.  And yeah, they are being too insistent in the face of a razor thin majority, both in conference and generally. But surely neither side - NEITHER SIDE (of the conference I mean) - is acting in good faith.

You blame the right for not moving. And I'll agree. But what did the middle move on?

What difference in that if there is never a win? They may as well be by themselves. Where is the profit in coalition from the Conservative side? A promise ten years from now?

True. At least in spirit. But not in the application. Three times in my life Conservatives have moved the needle. And that, each time, destroyed by their own conference in the next or following sessions. Read that. Their OWN betrayed them. Not the Democrats. Again, what profit?

So hard ball it is. If the RINOs want to side with the Democrats so be it. Let the voters sort it out.

Standing in opposition to 'what the Democrats are offering by the bushel' is the name of the game. Folding up and letting them do it is the Republican norm. I'll stand with the hot blood in that.

I agree!!   

[cato potatoe]

Just remember, this chick was too much of a pyro for the arson caucus.

[roamer_1]

Just remember, this chick was too much of a pyro for the arson caucus.

I'll agree with that. I get it that they are going to far. But the alternative is not to kiss the RINOs' a**es and let the Dems do whatever they want.

[libertybele]

I'll agree with that. I get it that they are going to far. But the alternative is not to kiss the RINOs' a**es and let the Dems do whatever they want.

How are they going too far???  Demanding border security is going too far???  Keep in mind that the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which was 18 years ago was approved by both houses and signed into law.  Funding has always been the issue.  Now we are at a very critical point in our country where 30,000,000 ILLEGALS are being allowed in, unvetted, many don't have a court date for another 5 years, to which they won't show up anyways.  So far judges have ruled that they can vote and that they have the right to arms and if they squat and take over your home -- good luck getting them out.

American citizens continue to fall victim to rape, murders and losing their homes to ILLEGALS. This isn't anything new.  Years ago during W's administration I attended prayers vigils for those who had been victimized by ILLEGALS; infants, teens, mothers, fathers, cops, border patrol, etc. We took turns reading out loud the stories associated with those victims.  Talk about bringing tears to your eyes .... it needs to stop! 

Giving into the DEMS hasn't worked for the past 18 years on this issue...and so they continue to win, while Americans continue to lose. This issue is now so politicized that it makes me absolutely sick.

So .... how is pushing back against this invasion going too far??

[roamer_1]

How are they going too far???  Demanding border security is going too far???  Keep in mind that the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which was 18 years ago was approved by both houses and signed into law.  Funding has always been the issue.  Now we are at a very critical point in our country where 30,000,000 ILLEGALS are being allowed in, unvetted, many don't have a court date for another 5 years, to which they won't show up anyways.  So far judges have ruled that they can vote and that they have the right to arms and if they squat and take over your home -- good luck getting them out.

American citizens continue to fall victim to rape, murders and losing their homes to ILLEGALS. This isn't anything new.  Years ago during W's administration I attended prayers vigils for those who had been victimized by ILLEGALS; infants, teens, mothers, fathers, cops, border patrol, etc. We took turns reading out loud the stories associated with those victims.  Talk about bringing tears to your eyes .... it needs to stop! 

Giving into the DEMS hasn't worked for the past 18 years on this issue...and so they continue to win, while Americans continue to lose. This issue is now so politicized that it makes me absolutely sick.

So .... how is pushing back against this invasion going too far??

** FULL STOP **

I get it. I do. And understand me when I say it makes no difference:

This among all the other things are reduced to objects  - Chips on the table.
It's a thing.
Don't care about the sore butt.
Don't care about the hyperventilating and anger.
It's a thing, like any other.

And in order to move that thing, you need to have a strong coalition
Doesn't matter the voters.
Doesn't matter the media.

All that is reduced to players around the table and things on the table.
How that moves is with coalition.
Barter. Tit for tat. Bribes. Blackmail.

500 people playing the game, pushed this way and that by their constituents, being affected by honoring past deals, forging new ones, all while trying not to piss each other off too much because they might need each other next time around. It's a fine line to walk for all of em, more so for leadership, who has the duty to herd all them cats in some sort of direction.

So it really doesn't matter the justice, or the dire nature. it takes time to craft a deal, and fair dinkum. and that never changes. So expecting them to hop to it and suddenly veer rightward is completely *not* going to happen. And being so insistent is doing damage.

They need the middle just as much as the middle needs them - Maybe more so since the middle will happily go vote with the crats.

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/toddstarnes/status/1771188213215895861

[libertybele]

https://twitter.com/toddstarnes/status/1771188213215895861

That's a great question -- he simply caved.  He has to deal with his actions and reasoning.  Unfortunately his decisions are effecting an entire country.  That's quite a weight to carry around on his shoulders.

[cato potatoe]

Giving into the DEMS hasn't worked for the past 18 years on this issue...and so they continue to win, while Americans continue to lose. This issue is now so politicized that it makes me absolutely sick.

So .... how is pushing back against this invasion going too far??

We don't have the votes to pass a conservative agenda, not even close.  The bills can only be moderated.  Remember there are half a dozen congressmen from NY, three from NJ, eight from CA, a couple from Dade County, and quite a few midwesterners.  If they fire Mike Johnson with their depleted numbers, they stand an excellent chance of not electing another republican speaker. 

[libertybele]

** FULL STOP **

I get it. I do. And understand me when I say it makes no difference:

This among all the other things are reduced to objects  - Chips on the table.
It's a thing.
Don't care about the sore butt.
Don't care about the hyperventilating and anger.
It's a thing, like any other.

And in order to move that thing, you need to have a strong coalition
Doesn't matter the voters.
Doesn't matter the media.

All that is reduced to players around the table and things on the table.
How that moves is with coalition.
Barter. Tit for tat. Bribes. Blackmail.

500 people playing the game, pushed this way and that by their constituents, being affected by honoring past deals, forging new ones, all while trying not to piss each other off too much because they might need each other next time around. It's a fine line to walk for all of em, more so for leadership, who has the duty to herd all them cats in some sort of direction.

So it really doesn't matter the justice, or the dire nature. it takes time to craft a deal, and fair dinkum. and that never changes. So expecting them to hop to it and suddenly veer rightward is completely *not* going to happen. And being so insistent is doing damage.

They need the middle just as much as the middle needs them - Maybe more so since the middle will happily go vote with the crats.

Ok, I'll stop....I was going to add to that, but it makes no difference.

There is nothing I can do anyways but sit and watch things unfold and pray, pray and pray.

[libertybele]

We don't have the votes to pass a conservative agenda, not even close.  The bills can only be moderated.  Remember there are half a dozen congressmen from NY, three from NJ, eight from CA, a couple from Dade County, and quite a few midwesterners.  If they fire Mike Johnson with their depleted numbers, they stand an excellent chance of not electing another republican speaker.

Understood. It makes no difference anymore.

[cato potatoe]

Understood. It makes no difference anymore.

It doesn't have to be a permanent condition.  The republicans need to regain one-two dozen House seats MAGA scared away, and quit nominating toxic senate candidates in the most critical swing states just because they kiss Trump's behind.

[libertybele]

It doesn't have to be a permanent condition.  The republicans need to regain one-two dozen House seats MAGA scared away, and quit nominating toxic senate candidates in the most critical swing states just because they kiss Trump's behind.

???? Again, this has absolutely NOTHING to do with Trump.  Border security is an AMERICAN issue, not a DEM or GOP issue.  If we continue to allow terrorists, gangsters, thugs, rapists, jihadists, Hamas, etc., into this country and allow them free reign as we are currently doing it is only a matter of time before we are overrun.  A judge just ruled that they can vote. Another judge ruled that they are allowed to own arms under the 2A.

Take a lesson from Germany, UK and France where they are overrun by supposed refugees.

DO you honestly think that there is time to regain House seats that MAGA supposedly scared away?

I don't know if you saw the post that Brandon will soon be meeting with the U.N. The meeting is to 'discuss' allowing the UN to use global emergency powers; thus, giving them power over the U.S.  That meeting is this September.  Gee, what do you think Brandon is going to do??

[roamer_1]

Ok, I'll stop....I was going to add to that, but it makes no difference.

There is nothing I can do anyways but sit and watch things unfold and pray, pray and pray.

Oh no darlin! I don't need !YOU! to stop. You're doing exactly as you should!
I'm just saying that does not translate into political action very well.

As orthodox to Conservatism and Constitution as I would prefer, I just know that a new speaker ain't gonna change Congress' spots in three short months. ANY movement rightward is a gain. Expecting a radical remake is a rather high expectation. Give him some time to get his feet set... A couple quarters... Thereafter, believe me, I will be right there with you.