The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: libertybele on October 11, 2017, 08:09:08 pm
-
Nothing like having your head on the chopping block, after you've done such a terrific job! Couldn't be happening to a nicer guy! Step down? He needs to find the first exit. :silly: :silly: :silly:
Conservative groups demand McConnell step down as Senate GOP leader
The leaders of several conservative groups called Wednesday for Mitch McConnell to step down as Senate majority leader, arguing the Kentucky Republican and the rest of his team should be ousted from their posts because they have not implemented the conservative agenda they promised.
“We call on all five members of the GOP Senate leadership to step down, or for their caucus to remove them as soon as possible,” Ken Cuccinelli, the former attorney general of Virginia who now leads the Senate Conservatives Fund, said at a Wednesday press conference on Capitol Hill.
All the leaders come from anti-Republican establishment organizations with ties to the Tea Party movement. They have long been thorns in McConnell’s side and have backed conservative challengers to Republican incumbents in Senate races. They include representatives from FreedomWorks, the Tea Party Patriots and For America......
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/10/11/conservative-groups-demand-mcconnell-step-down-as-senate-gop-leader.html
-
I sense that McConnell's decision to end "the blue slip" regarding judicial nominees was based in part by [what he probably perceived to be] growing opposition to his continued leadership position.
Nevertheless, we should keep the steam pressure up.
Next stop -- jettison the filibuster!
-
If it wasn't for McConnell Supreme Court Justice Merrick B. Garland would be deciding cases, and the one tangible accomplishment of President Trump, nominating Gorsuch, would never have been confirmed by the McConnell Senate...so yeah. Throw the Trump luving pr*ck out the Senate.
Clearly the GOP is too corrupt and too inept to have such responsibility. I look forward to the SCF and Freedomworks working tirelessly to unseat Republicans again next year. Cause nuthin says conservative like bashing Republicans. 22222frying pan
-
Conservatives have been fighting for the soul of the GOP for a long time, while the moderates have been pimping it out on every corner down K street and beyond.
The bottom line is that these people got support from the TEA party people based on a set of promises that remain unfulfilled, most prominent the repeal (not tinkering with or rebranding of) the ACA. Other examples apply. Too many awsh*ts and not enough 'attaboys'. As for "Republicans" for whom I recall the term RINO being used, (like McCain Collins, Graham, and Murkowski, for starters), who all too consistently vote with the Democrats, replacement is the only option (although in McCain's case, he might leave office naturally).
-
Conservatives have been fighting for the soul of the GOP for a long time, while the moderates have been pimping it out on every corner down K street and beyond.
The bottom line is that these people got support from the TEA party people based on a set of promises that remain unfulfilled, most prominent the repeal (not tinkering with or rebranding of) the ACA. Other examples apply. Too many awsh*ts and not enough 'attaboys'. As for "Republicans" for whom I recall the term RINO being used, (like McCain Collins, Graham, and Murkowski, for starters), who all too consistently vote with the Democrats, replacement is the only option (although in McCain's case, he might leave office naturally).
I'm one of those who was in the fight for a LONG time! Had some success here in Texas but on the national level not so much!
-
I sense that McConnell's decision to end "the blue slip" regarding judicial nominees was based in part by [what he probably perceived to be] growing opposition to his continued leadership position.
Nevertheless, we should keep the steam pressure up.
Next stop -- jettison the filibuster!
Agreed, at least in the abstract - what is holding things back isn't McConnell's leadership per se, but ancient Senate rules and traditions that give a determined, united and cynical minority the ability to grind things to a halt. The Dems constitute such a determined, united and cynical minority, and a damned effective one. The questions becomes whether it is now time to change those rules and traditions, recognizing that a time will come when Republicans' ability to check Democratic ambitions will be adversely affected.
I'd be much more enthusiastic about changing Senate rules if the GOP were united. Since it is curiously engaged in fratricide, notwithstanding holding majorities in both houses, conservatives' dream of governing is slipping away. Since we will likely lose control in 2018, we should think ahead to a future where conservatives will have diminished influence, and will again be in the position of having to check Democratic initiatives. We are on the horns of a dilemma, and only have ourselves to blame.
-
The questions becomes whether it is now time to change those rules and traditions, recognizing that a time will come when Republicans' ability to check Democratic ambitions will be adversely affected.
Exactly.
With "Change" often being the mode of the Left (after all, the right is "conservative" -- meaning hesitant to change), weakening these hindrances to change will favor The Left's intent to tear down what we have.
-
Exactly.
With "Change" often being the mode of the Left (after all, the right is "conservative" -- meaning hesitant to change), weakening these hindrances to change will favor The Left's intent to tear down what we have.
We're eager to deny the minority its historic rights to obstruct the majority now that we're "in power", but at the same time engage in fratricide that imperils our majority.
What the hell do conservatives want? To govern? To purge the hated "moderates"? You can't do both at the same time. And if the goal is to purge main street Republicans in favor of Breitbart extremists, then we better make sure we don't jettison the filibuster, because it will soon be the primary tool that Republicans have when we return to backbencher status.
It's utter madness, folks, and it's all self-inflicted.
-
We're eager to deny the minority its historic rights to obstruct the majority now that we're "in power", but at the same time engage in fratricide that imperils our majority.
What the hell do conservatives want? To govern? To purge the hated "moderates"? You can't do both at the same time. And if the goal is to purge main street Republicans in favor of Breitbart extremists, then we better make sure we don't jettison the filibuster, because it will soon be the primary tool that Republicans have when we return to backbencher status.
It's utter madness, folks, and it's all self-inflicted.
Man that post sounds like it came from a leftist manual
-
Man that post sounds like it came from a leftist manual
Can't or won't address it on the merits, eh?
Why don't you grow up and recognize the Republican Party is a coalition? Fratricide will destroy the party, and with it the influence of whatever faction you're a part of.
-
Can't or won't address it on the merits, eh?
Why don't you grow up and recognize the Republican Party is a coalition? Fratricide will destroy the party, and with it the influence of whatever faction you're a part of.
@Jazzhead
Merits? You spew hate at anyone that disagrees with you. you call anyone who supports traditional American values an extremist.
I don't see any merit in that.
-
Man that post sounds like it came from a leftist manual
Yeah, 'make the enemy live up to its own rules' while they do whatever the hell they need to do to implement their agenda. They turn their concern for protocol and good form on and off like a light switch.
Meanwhile the republic continues its slide down the commode.
-
@Jazzhead
Merits? You spew hate at anyone that disagrees with you. you call anyone who supports traditional American values an extremist.
I don't see any merit in that.
I "spew hate" (your words, not mine) at those who react to opposing opinions not by addressing them on the merits but rather ascribing them to a "leftist manual".
I have for years been loyal to a Republican coalition that includes main street conservatives and moderates, social conservatives like yourself, libertarians and, lately, the nativist/isolationist fringies attracted by Donald Trump. And now all factions are at war with one another - at a time when we have unprecedented control of all branches of government. We're pissing it all away. You want the leftists in control again? Keep it up, you damn fool, keep it up.
-
I "spew hate" (your words, not mine) at those who react to opposing opinions not by addressing them on the merits but rather ascribing them to a "leftist manual".
I have for years been loyal to a Republican coalition that includes main street conservatives and moderates, social conservatives like yourself, libertarians and, lately, the nativist/isolationist fringies attracted by Donald Trump. And now all factions are at war with one another - at a time when we have unprecedented control of all branches of government. We're pissing it all away. You want the leftists in control again? Keep it up, you damn fool, keep it up.
@Jazzhead
You spew hate at anyone that doesn't support your radical leftist ideals of abortion on demand, normalization of homosexual behavior, gay marriage, destruction of the Christian faith and so on.
IF you are a Republican you are exactly what is wrong with the GOP who has become so distanced from real Americans they can't understand what this country really is.
-
And now all factions are at war with one another - at a time when we have unprecedented control of all branches of government. We're pissing it all away. You want the leftists in control again? Keep it up, you damn fool, keep it up.
Tell me again why the "moderates", as you call them, aren't more responsible for the current paralysis as the "extremists", as you call them?
Trump is the de facto party leader and with one or two exceptions it always seems to be the "moderates" obstructing him. Yet they never seem to be the target of your criticism.
-
We're eager to deny the minority its historic rights to obstruct the majority now that we're "in power", but at the same time engage in fratricide that imperils our majority.
What the hell do conservatives want? To govern? To purge the hated "moderates"? You can't do both at the same time. And if the goal is to purge main street Republicans in favor of Breitbart extremists, then we better make sure we don't jettison the filibuster, because it will soon be the primary tool that Republicans have when we return to backbencher status.
It's utter madness, folks, and it's all self-inflicted.
Sorry Jazz, but there's only so many layers deep I'm willing to go with a representative republic. In every state I know of, if you win the majority, you control the chamber. There's little the minority can do about it.
There's too much of minority veto power in the US Senate. Blue slips, filibuster, committee maneuvers gives the minority a power they don't deserve because they couldn't win the votes of the American people to control the majority.
That applies to Republicans too. If we can't win, then we take our lumps. I'm a firm believer that if you win the majority, then you should have control, not add 6 more layers of minority veto to shackle the process to a standstill.
-
I'm one of those who was in the fight for a LONG time! Had some success here in Texas but on the national level not so much!
'Some' is right. Cornyn has become a swamp creature and Kay Bailey was a disaster. The 'Some' of course is Cruz, and now Abbott.
-
Sorry Jazz, but there's only so many layers deep I'm willing to go with a representative republic. In every state I know of, if you win the majority, you control the chamber. There's little the minority can do about it.
There's too much of minority veto power in the US Senate. Blue slips, filibuster, committee maneuvers gives the minority a power they don't deserve because they couldn't win the votes of the American people to control the majority.
That applies to Republicans too. If we can't win, then we take our lumps. I'm a firm believer that if you win the majority, then you should have control, not add 6 more layers of minority veto to shackle the process to a standstill.
I understand. I agree - in the abstract. But you don't dismantle the rules that empower the minority at the same time you're engaged in fratricide that - let's be honest - is well-nigh guaranteed to land Republicans right back in the minority.
Do you realize how crazy this all is? Purges and fratricide are what happens to minority parties, trying to find some way to get back into power. We have the power - Presidency and both Houses of Congress - and we can't practice the art of solidarity. Bannon's declared war on moderate Republicans; Paul's acting like a fool, Trump has no idea how to work cooperatively with Congress and is actively poisoning the well with the heads of the important committees he'll need to pass his priorities.
The GOP these days is one giant clusterphuck, and the noisiest are asking for McConnell's head because he won't move to end the filibuster that we're going to need when the cold water of reality hits and Chuckie and Nancy are back in control.
-
@Jazzhead
You spew hate at anyone that doesn't support your radical leftist ideals of abortion on demand, normalization of homosexual behavior, gay marriage, destruction of the Christian faith and so on.
IF you are a Republican you are exactly what is wrong with the GOP who has become so distanced from real Americans they can't understand what this country really is.
Oh, just shut up. This isn't the thread for this crapola. You're a social conservative, I'm not. So what? For years, I've supported a GOP that includes Neanderthals like you, and I will continue to do so, because I know the GOP can ONLY SUCCEED as a coalition, of folks with different perspectives but devoted to the Constitution, individual liberty and the equal protection of the law.
-
I understand. I agree - in the abstract. But you don't dismantle the rules that empower the minority at the same time you're engaged in fratricide that - let's be honest - is well-nigh guaranteed to land Republicans right back in the minority.
Do you realize how crazy this all is? Purges and fratricide are what happens to minority parties, trying to find some way to get back into power. We have the power - Presidency and both Houses of Congress - and we can't practice the art of solidarity. Bannon's declared war on moderate Republicans; Paul's acting like a fool, Trump has no idea how to work cooperatively with Congress and is actively poisoning the well with the heads of the important committees he'll need to pass his priorities.
The GOP these days is one giant clusterphuck, and the noisiest are asking for McConnell's head because he won't move to end the filibuster that we're going to need when the cold water of reality hits and Chuckie and Nancy are back in control.
There is a rare and golden opportunity to add GOP seats this election. 60+ seats in the Senate will make inaction a great deal harder. We just need good candidates who can win.
-
I understand. I agree - in the abstract. But you don't dismantle the rules that empower the minority at the same time you're engaged in fratricide that - let's be honest - is well-nigh guaranteed to land Republicans right back in the minority.
Do you realize how crazy this all is? Purges and fratricide are what happens to minority parties, trying to find some way to get back into power. We have the power - Presidency and both Houses of Congress - and we can't practice the art of solidarity. Bannon's declared war on moderate Republicans; Paul's acting like a fool, Trump has no idea how to work cooperatively with Congress and is actively poisoning the well with the heads of the important committees he'll need to pass his priorities.
The GOP these days is one giant clusterphuck, and the noisiest are asking for McConnell's head because he won't move to end the filibuster that we're going to need when the cold water of reality hits and Chuckie and Nancy are back in control.
Here it is again. It’s all the noisy “extremists” fault, refusing to cooperate with the poor well intentioned moderates.
-
There is a rare and golden opportunity to add GOP seats this election. 60+ seats in the Senate will make inaction a great deal harder. We just need good candidates who can win.
That's right! So why are so many folks clamoring to primary incumbents with Brietbart extremists?
-
Here it is again. It’s all the noisy “extremists” fault, refusing to cooperate with the poor well intentioned moderates.
Solidarity requires compromise - for the greater good - on the part of both conservatives and moderates.
-
Oh, just shut up. This isn't the thread for this crapola. You're a social conservative, I'm not. So what? For years, I've supported a GOP that includes Neanderthals like you, and I will continue to do so, because I know the GOP can ONLY SUCCEED as a coalition, of folks with different perspectives but devoted to the Constitution, individual liberty and the equal protection of the law.
Wow, Jazzhead, when did you get onboard with supporting the Constitution? I'm glad you've made that leap, but what changed your mind?
-
Agreed, at least in the abstract - what is holding things back isn't McConnell's leadership per se, but ancient Senate rules and traditions that give a determined, united and cynical minority the ability to grind things to a halt. The Dems constitute such a determined, united and cynical minority, and a damned effective one. The questions becomes whether it is now time to change those rules and traditions, recognizing that a time will come when Republicans' ability to check Democratic ambitions will be adversely affected.
I'd be much more enthusiastic about changing Senate rules if the GOP were united. Since it is curiously engaged in fratricide, notwithstanding holding majorities in both houses, conservatives' dream of governing is slipping away. Since we will likely lose control in 2018, we should think ahead to a future where conservatives will have diminished influence, and will again be in the position of having to check Democratic initiatives. We are on the horns of a dilemma, and only have ourselves to blame.
I don't see Conservatives with diminished influence, because frankly, Conservatives seem to have little influence over either Party. I do see Republicans with diminished influence, but that will be a result of them not being Conservative and instead acting like the Democrats they are allegedly not.
-
Conservatives have been fighting for the soul of the GOP for a long time, while the moderates have been pimping it out on every corner down K street and beyond.
The bottom line is that these people got support from the TEA party people based on a set of promises that remain unfulfilled, most prominent the repeal (not tinkering with or rebranding of) the ACA. Other examples apply. Too many awsh*ts and not enough 'attaboys'. As for "Republicans" for whom I recall the term RINO being used, (like McCain Collins, Graham, and Murkowski, for starters), who all too consistently vote with the Democrats, replacement is the only option (although in McCain's case, he might leave office naturally).
:amen:
I wasted a lot years being loyal to the Pub party. I believed we could get incremental conservative change by compromising with the "moderates" in the party. One thing Pres. Trump has gotten me to see is how the loyalty doesn't cut both ways. To heck with the Pubs. I'll vote for conservatives. If the Rats ever run a real conservative I vote for them. I have no party loyalty now.
-
I "spew hate" (your words, not mine) at those who react to opposing opinions not by addressing them on the merits but rather ascribing them to a "leftist manual".
I have for years been loyal to a Republican coalition that includes main street conservatives and moderates, social conservatives like yourself, libertarians and, lately, the nativist/isolationist fringies attracted by Donald Trump. And now all factions are at war with one another - at a time when we have unprecedented control of all branches of government. We're pissing it all away. You want the leftists in control again? Keep it up, you damn fool, keep it up.
You never consider the preferred alternative. The Conservative option.
Those Promises of repealing the ACA? KEEP THEM.
The promise of reducing the tax burden? KEEP IT.
The promise of reducing crippling regulation? KEEP IT.
If the GOP acts with integrity, it will prevail.
If It does not, then people will stay home and check their preps and and clean their rifles and wait for the S to HTF, because it will--because the GOP will NOT have done its job to keep the promises that got its members elected.
Cut Government (size and scope) cut Spending... et fricking cetera.
Now that it has the majorities of both houses of Congress and the White House, the very things which were so easy to pass when they would be vetoed just aren't getting through, and it is the Moderates who will not have them.
THERE IS NO EXCUSE AND HALF-ASSED MEASURES WON'T CUT IT.
For the average GOP voter, there is little other than habit and fear of the ever convergent Democrat policy to get them to the polls. The difference between the Dems and the GOP is getting thin.
For those of us who have grand kids and great grandkids, if we're going to have CWII, let's get this shit over with while we can still shoot, pack a rifle, and help teach those young 'uns the skills they will need to survive.
Otherwise, it's time to call for question for the GOP: sh*t or get off the pot.
-
I have no party loyalty now.
Suit yourself. The party amplifies the power and influence of its members. If you won't support the party, you've diminished yourself. You think that's smart?
-
You never consider the preferred alternative. The Conservative option.
Those Promises of repealing the ACA? KEEP THEM.
The promise of reducing the tax burden? KEEP IT.
The promise of reducing crippling regulation? KEEP IT.
If the GOP acts with integrity, it will prevail.
If It does not, then people will stay home and check their preps and and clean their rifles and wait for the S to HTF, because it will--because the GOP will NOT have done its job to keep the promises that got its members elected.
Cut Government (size and scope) cut Spending... et fricking cetera.
Now that it has the majorities of both houses of Congress and the White House, the very things which were so easy to pass when they would be vetoed just aren't getting through, and it is the Moderates who will not have them.
THERE IS NO EXCUSE AND HALF-ASSED MEASURES WON'T CUT IT.
For the average GOP voter, there is little other than habit and fear of the ever convergent Democrat policy to get them to the polls. The difference between the Dems and the GOP is getting thin.
For those of us who have grand kids and great grandkids, if we're going to have CWII, let's get this shit over with while we can still shoot, pack a rifle, and help teach those young 'uns the skills they will need to survive.
Otherwise, it's time to call for question for the GOP: sh*t or get off the pot.
*****rollingeyes*****
-
The GOP these days is one giant clusterphuck, and the noisiest are asking for McConnell's head because he won't move to end the filibuster that we're going to need when the cold water of reality hits and Chuckie and Nancy are back in control.
While we may not agree on the source of the situation, I agree the filibuster should not be discarded. If the GOP keeps up its perfidy the Conservatives left in Congress will need the filibuster to have any impact at all.
-
*****rollingeyes*****
Keep rolling your eyes. You stinking moderates are the ones who will cost the GOP its power.
-
The only thing one finds in the middle of the road are yellow stripes and dead armadillos!
-
:amen:
I wasted a lot years being loyal to the Pub party. I believed we could get incremental conservative change by compromising with the "moderates" in the party. One thing Pres. Trump has gotten me to see is how the loyalty doesn't cut both ways. To heck with the Pubs. I'll vote for conservatives. If the Rats ever run a real conservative I vote for them. I have no party loyalty now.
You and me both! I'm done with them!
-
Sorry Jazz, but there's only so many layers deep I'm willing to go with a representative republic. In every state I know of, if you win the majority, you control the chamber. There's little the minority can do about it.
There's too much of minority veto power in the US Senate. Blue slips, filibuster, committee maneuvers gives the minority a power they don't deserve because they couldn't win the votes of the American people to control the majority.
That applies to Republicans too. If we can't win, then we take our lumps. I'm a firm believer that if you win the majority, then you should have control, not add 6 more layers of minority veto to shackle the process to a standstill.
But being able to blame the shackles of minority influence enables the GOP in Congress to keep the promises they made down on K Street AND have an excuse to hand the 'rubes' back home. AND they keep their phony baloney jobs!
-
Here it is again. It’s all the noisy “extremists” fault, refusing to cooperate with the poor well intentioned moderates.
Well, the failure to shift to the Left seems to be a consistent 'sin' in DC. But they never have to shift Right...
-
Keep rolling your eyes. You stinking moderates are the ones who will cost the GOP its power.
I won't abandon the ship. You will.
-
Solidarity requires compromise - for the greater good - on the part of both conservatives and moderates.
So it's about time the moderates compromised with Conservatives instead of running to cater to the Leftists.
-
Well, the failure to shift to the Left seems to be a consistent 'sin' in DC. But they never have to shift Right...
You want your way or the highway. Good luck being alone out there in the blue . . .
-
So it's about time the moderates compromised with Conservatives instead of running to cater to the Leftists.
The most recent ObamaCare reform bill - which would have converted an embedded entitlement for the first time ever into block grants to the states - was killed by Rand Paul, the stupidest man to walk the halls of the Senate.
-
I won't abandon the ship. You will.
No? Well go down with it then. Your kind put it on the rocks. When you are on the port side of the channel, only steering one point to port instead of two won't put you back in deep water.
-
Suit yourself. The party amplifies the power and influence of its members. If you won't support the party, you've diminished yourself. You think that's smart?
You smoking crack? The party has no influence and power. That's why losers like Dent and Corker are leaving even though they are the part in power. They have been exposed for the frauds they are. Ryan and McConnell are universally hated by everyone not because they are powerful and getting things done. They are hated because they are feckless pansies.
-
The most recent ObamaCare reform bill - which would have converted an embedded entitlement for the first time ever into block grants to the states - was killed by Rand Paul, the stupidest man to walk the halls of the Senate.
You mean the bill that would have added another layer of bureaucracy to the ACA? The Law we were repeatedly promised would be repealed "root and branch"?
Good. Repeal the damned law. All of it. If I promise to pay you 20 bucks an hour and, come payday, hand you ten, you'd be pissed off, too.
-
You mean the bill that would have added another layer of bureaucracy to the ACA? The Law we were repeatedly promised would be repealed "root and branch"?
Good. Repeal the damned law. All of it. If I promise to pay you 20 bucks an hour and, come payday, hand you ten, you'd be pissed off, too.
I'd be happy if they handed me 10. Instead they're handing me a bill for $15. Work privilege tax.
-
But being able to blame the shackles of minority influence enables the GOP in Congress to keep the promises they made down on K Street AND have an excuse to hand the 'rubes' back home. AND they keep their phony baloney jobs!
And that's exactly how the game is played. I live in a conservative blue collar Dem county. Our former Democrat state senator for years would vote against his liberal caucus - unless the vote was very close and his vote was needed. He was always so magically reliable that way.
This is being done in reverse. McConnell well knows the Terrible Three are going to peel away and kill anything put out there. Then nothing happens, and they flip the bird at Trump, because the popular girls don't like the new girl that just showed up to jr. high.
The only remedy I know, being that we're only a year away, is to get conservative Republicans nominated and win the general. Get 58+ Reps in the Senate and then let McConnell try and play that game. It will be too glaringly obvious to go thru the whole bill process and than have 10+ senators peel off at the last second. Which they still may try that, or cobble crap legislation, one thing is for sure: you are going to know where things stand real quick. None of this limbo crap like it has been for 9 months.
And if it doesn't go well, you and I know it's time to move to the 100 acres in the woods and build a cabin. We are $20T in debt and cannot afford to raise interest rates. China is soon going to be tying the yuan to oil and gold both, putting pressure on both the dollar and interest rates. We are in a rock and a hard place and I think have no more than 5 years to figure it out, if it's not too late already.
-
Conservatives have been fighting for the soul of the GOP for a long time, while the moderates have been pimping it out on every corner down K street and beyond.
The bottom line is that these people got support from the TEA party people based on a set of promises that remain unfulfilled, most prominent the repeal (not tinkering with or rebranding of) the ACA.
The FACT is President Trump's agenda is mainly the same as those Tea Party types.
-
You want your way or the highway. Good luck being alone out there in the blue . . .
You might consider that for forty years we have been told just that. "Suck it up"
"Handle it"
"This is the way it is"
"Be realistic"
"Be reasonable"
"You HAVE to COMPROMISE".
Ever drifting leftward, and even attempting to put things back on course assured we had to give some to get some, which always resulted in another net loss of existing Rights and Liberty.
When the GOP has had power it consistently has been a complete failure when it comes to reversing the depredations of the Left. That has been the only thing the GOP has been really good at, with the exception of, once again, selling the idea on the constituency that it is the ONLY alternative to the express trip into the abyss, is being the slow freight of hellbound trains, but still going the same way to the same destination.
I have had enough of this crap. I am far from alone.
It is past time for Conservatives to purge the moderates from the GOP ("my way"), or to unite in a different Party ("the highway").
-
And that's exactly how the game is played. I live in a conservative blue collar Dem county. Our former Democrat state senator for years would vote against his liberal caucus - unless the vote was very close and his vote was needed. He was always so magically reliable that way.
This is being done in reverse. McConnell well knows the Terrible Three are going to peel away and kill anything put out there. Then nothing happens, and they flip the bird at Trump, because the popular girls don't like the new girl that just showed up to jr. high.
The only remedy I know, being that we're only a year away, is to get conservative Republicans nominated and win the general. Get 58+ Reps in the Senate and then let McConnell try and play that game. It will be too glaringly obvious to go thru the whole bill process and than have 10+ senators peel off at the last second. Which they still may try that, or cobble crap legislation, one thing is for sure: you are going to know where things stand real quick. None of this limbo crap like it has been for 9 months.
And if it doesn't go well, you and I know it's time to move to the 100 acres in the woods and build a cabin. We are $20T in debt and cannot afford to raise interest rates. China is soon going to be tying the yuan to oil and gold both, putting pressure on both the dollar and interest rates. We are in a rock and a hard place and I think have no more than 5 years to figure it out, if it's not too late already.
It's a game that they're playing and we're the pawns. The dems move ever leftward, and the Rs, in order to maintain their "moderate" status move leftward too. As long as they appear slightly to the right of the dems, they are the only option for anyone who is genuinely middle-of-the-road-to-conservative have. Anyone who sticks their head up over the Beltway barricade as a conservative becomes target practice. Even amongst the "moderate republicans".
-
The FACT is President Trump's agenda is mainly the same as those Tea Party types.
He can't sign it if the Congress doesn't put it on his desk.
-
China is soon going to be tying the yuan to oil and gold both, putting pressure on both the dollar and interest rates. We are in a rock and a hard place and I think have no more than 5 years to figure it out, if it's not too late already.
China already has. Let the "petrodollar" lose reserve currency status, and we might as well be Zimbabwe, economically. Get your bank account in ones for maximum utility, because a buck will be far cheaper than Charmin.
-
You mean the bill that would have added another layer of bureaucracy to the ACA?
No, the bill that would have converted the ACA into something consistent with conservative notions of Constitutional federalism, and let the states innovate and decide how to design an insurance market that works for their citizens.
The "root and branch" repeal you demand is a fantasy. There is no majority for it, because the reality is that millions benefit from ObamaCare. Incremental change - in a conservative direction - is better than no change at all. You may not like it, but reality bites.
-
No, the bill that would have converted the ACA into something consistent with conservative notions of Constitutional federalism, and let the states innovate and decide how to design an insurance market that works for their citizens.
The "root and branch" repeal you demand is a fantasy. There is no majority for it, because the reality is that millions benefit from ObamaCare. Incremental change - in a conservative direction - is better than no change at all. You may not like it, but reality bites.
If the Federal Government is deciding who gets what money to dole out at another level, that is two layers of bureaucracy. That is one more than there was. How about we keep our money get the government out of the exam room, and spend it on health CARE ourselves, without all the middlemen?
Repeal the ACA.
The current crop of people in the GOP in Congress sold that fantasy. If they had no intent to deliver, they are guilty of fraud. They should lose their jobs and be replaced with people who won't lie to us.
-
Just for whenever we hear folks saying they are leaving the party, the inability to get things done really comes down to the Senate.
States where the GOP run the legislature and governorship; are really doing rather splendidly, Wisconsin, Texas, Florida and actually, even Ohio. Ohio was a mess 5 or 6 years ago, a real diaspora because they were flocking to places where there were jobs. Kasich gets on a lot of people's bad lists but economically, he and the legislature really turned that state around.
Yes, and Trump has affected some positive changes with the limitations of the executive branch, rolling back the LGBT agenda, jobs and so on.
There there are those who want to leave the party, okay, don't let the door hit you on the way out. 9999hair out0000 I'll be proud of voting for the GOP nominee as usual; and if he does well on these things, I hope one can mention it.
-
Just for whenever we hear folks saying they are leaving the party, the inability to get things done really comes down to the Senate.
States where the GOP run the legislature and governorship; are really doing rather splendidly, Wisconsin, Texas, Florida and actually, even Ohio. Ohio was a mess 5 or 6 years ago, a real diaspora because they were flocking to places where there were jobs. Kasich gets on a lot of people's bad lists but economically, he and the legislature really turned that state around.
Yes, and Trump has affected some positive changes with the limitations of the executive branch, rolling back the LGBT agenda, jobs and so on.
There there are those who want to leave the party, okay, don't let the door hit you on the way out. 9999hair out0000 I'll be proud of voting for the GOP nominee as usual; and if he does well on these things, I hope one can mention it.
Kudos, TomSea, for a sensible, pragmatic post that represents mature thinking. A refreshing change from the childish nose-cutting of some folks here.
You're right - the current gridlock really does come down to the Senate. At the state level, conservatives have been gaining in influence and accomplishments. As has been pointed out, 2018 represents a golden opportunity to increase our Senate majority, perhaps even to grow it to make the minority filibuster irrelevant. But that takes a commitment to solidarity among moderates and conservatives, to vote for the GOP nominee, and not to quit the party in a self-destructive pout-fest.
-
Just for whenever we hear folks saying they are leaving the party, the inability to get things done really comes down to the Senate.
States where the GOP run the legislature and governorship; are really doing rather splendidly, Wisconsin, Texas, Florida and actually, even Ohio. Ohio was a mess 5 or 6 years ago, a real diaspora because they were flocking to places where there were jobs. Kasich gets on a lot of people's bad lists but economically, he and the legislature really turned that state around.
Yes, and Trump has affected some positive changes with the limitations of the executive branch, rolling back the LGBT agenda, jobs and so on.
There there are those who want to leave the party, okay, don't let the door hit you on the way out. 9999hair out0000 I'll be proud of voting for the GOP nominee as usual; and if he does well on these things, I hope one can mention it.
Maybe. For quite a while the GOP here did well. Under Ed Shaffer, the government cut back across the board during the decline in the late '70s/early 80s oil boom, and got the State in the black. Spending increased afterwards, with the State staying in the black and amassing a surplus in funds set aside from oil revenues.
Then during the last oil boom, the GOP dominated State Government went on a spending spree that would have given a drunken sailor a bad name, and established ongoing programs that are not so well funded with the decline in oil prices. It wasn't as if the pattern of boom and bust were not already established (the Bakken Boom was the fourth oil boom in the State). So, the drift toward 'moderate' policy has been evident in the Democrat like spending of the GOP here at the State level, too.
Keep in mind there was no primary for POTUS in ND last go-round, and the State GOP has pulled some crap at the State conventions as well. (Like calling for objections and killing power to the microphones when someone stepped up, then saying "Hearing none..." and proceeding to railroad the proceedings.)
Taxation without representation doesn't cut it by me, I don't give a damn who does it.
-
He can't sign it if the Congress doesn't put it on his desk.
Trump is NOT the problem, contrary to popular belief here.
The problem is fewer than one half dozen Senators.
Apparently neither Trump or McConnell (or other associated players) can sway them.
I am pleased to see President Trump using his administrative options, to do what can be done.
-
Trump is NOT the problem, contrary to popular belief here.
The problem is fewer than one half dozen Senators.
Apparently neither Trump or McConnell (or other associated players) can sway them.
I am pleased to see President Trump using his administrative options, to do what can be done.
I see the following: McCain, Collins, Murkowski, and Graham as being the primary ones who jump across the aisle. McConnell isn't in any rush to push them back, from what I have seen, and has not pushed for sufficiently conservative legislation to take in the conservatives. It's poor leadership on his part.
There were promises made, and the American people expect them to be fulfilled. Failure will have consequences.
-
And if it doesn't go well, you and I know it's time to move to the 100 acres in the woods and build a cabin. We are $20T in debt and cannot afford to raise interest rates. China is soon going to be tying the yuan to oil and gold both, putting pressure on both the dollar and interest rates. We are in a rock and a hard place and I think have no more than 5 years to figure it out, if it's not too late already.
I've long believed that the dollar's reserve and de facto world currency status was a curse, not a blessing. Unfortunately, no one will notice until the music stops.
-
Smokin' Joe wrote:
"While we may not agree on the source of the situation, I agree the filibuster should not be discarded. If the GOP keeps up its perfidy the Conservatives left in Congress will need the filibuster to have any impact at all."
Nope.
The Constitution specifies those few instances in which a supermajority is required (rather than 50% + 1).
The filibuster rule in the Senate IS NOT one of them.
It's not only a violation of the spirit of the Constitution -- majority rule under the rule of law -- but of the letter of that document, as well.
GET RID OF IT.
I can live with the consequences.
IF the Pubbies end the filibuster rule, they will survive to control the Senate for another decade, at least.
IF they refuse to do it, they may not survive past 2020...
-
Smokin' Joe wrote:
"While we may not agree on the source of the situation, I agree the filibuster should not be discarded. If the GOP keeps up its perfidy the Conservatives left in Congress will need the filibuster to have any impact at all."
Nope.
The Constitution specifies those few instances in which a supermajority is required (rather than 50% + 1).
The filibuster rule in the Senate IS NOT one of them.
It's not only a violation of the spirit of the Constitution -- majority rule under the rule of law -- but of the letter of that document, as well.
GET RID OF IT.
I can live with the consequences.
IF the Pubbies end the filibuster rule, they will survive to control the Senate for another decade, at least.
IF they refuse to do it, they may not survive past 2020...
The filibuster was created in 1806, the 1917 and subsequent cloture rules are what you want to get rid of, requiring a 60 vote, or even 2/3 majority to invoke cloture and limit debate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate#The_two-track_system.2C_60-vote_rule.2C_and_rise_of_the_routine_filibuster_.281970_onward.29 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate#The_two-track_system.2C_60-vote_rule.2C_and_rise_of_the_routine_filibuster_.281970_onward.29)
A word of caution, the Republicans do not have the majority vote they can count on, with the aisle jumpers like McCain and Collins (and Graham and Murkowski). just to name four frequent fliers, there. Eliminating the rule may work against the GOP, too.
-
Smokin' Joe wrote:
"While we may not agree on the source of the situation, I agree the filibuster should not be discarded. If the GOP keeps up its perfidy the Conservatives left in Congress will need the filibuster to have any impact at all."
Nope.
The Constitution specifies those few instances in which a supermajority is required (rather than 50% + 1).
The filibuster rule in the Senate IS NOT one of them.
It's not only a violation of the spirit of the Constitution -- majority rule under the rule of law -- but of the letter of that document, as well.
GET RID OF IT.
I can live with the consequences.
IF the Pubbies end the filibuster rule, they will survive to control the Senate for another decade, at least.
IF they refuse to do it, they may not survive past 2020...
"Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings"
Not just within the spirit, but the letter as well.
-
Smokin' Joe wrote:
"While we may not agree on the source of the situation, I agree the filibuster should not be discarded. If the GOP keeps up its perfidy the Conservatives left in Congress will need the filibuster to have any impact at all."
Nope.
The Constitution specifies those few instances in which a supermajority is required (rather than 50% + 1).
The filibuster rule in the Senate IS NOT one of them.
It's not only a violation of the spirit of the Constitution -- majority rule under the rule of law -- but of the letter of that document, as well.
GET RID OF IT.
I can live with the consequences.
IF the Pubbies end the filibuster rule, they will survive to control the Senate for another decade, at least.
IF they refuse to do it, they may not survive past 2020...
I understand the calculation you're making, but is it realistic, given Bannon's hysterics about primarying GOP Senate incumbants across the board with Breitbart extremists? I think Bannon and his divisive ilk are imperiling the Senate majority, and for that reason I'm reluctant to end the filibuster, given that we may soon be needing it. If we had solidarity then, yeah, sure, junk the thing and let's get to work. But solidarity is a dirty word among Republicans these days - it's faction against faction.
This gets back to the thread topic - conservatives demanding the ouster of FELLOW REPUBLICANS they deem too "moderate". I think we need to face squarely what's at stake in 2018. We are on the precipice of an historic conservative victory, a true transformation of the federal judiciary. It's not just Gorsuch, who many conservatives consider Trump's greatest triumph. Trump has nominated 60 brilliant conservative minds, Constitutional textualists all, to the federal bench. He has another 160 vacancies to fill. And the Dems, back in 2013, foolishly ended the filibuster for judicial nominees - foolish because something happened that in their arrogance and hubris they never expected - a Republican took back the White House.
Trump hasn't made judicial appointments like Bush did. Bush tended to nominate safe choices, choices with little baggage who could survive the threat of a Democratic veto in the Senate. Trump has been freed by the end of the judicial filibuster to appoint true conservatives, conservatives that can be confirmed and shape the course of jurisprudence for the next 40 years. And right by his side, btw, in getting these conservative minds confirmed and on the bench, is Mitch McConnell. Let's not forget how important McConnell is to this project. This has the potential to be Trump's and McConnell's greatest legacy to the cause of conservatism.
It's a wonderful thing to contemplate - if we don't blow it and lose the Senate. But it's a cautionary tale as well - the Dems sure as hell didn't think they'd be in this pickle when they ended the judicial filibuster. They thought they'd be in charge forever, just as you do, Smokin' Joe. They thought they could blow off the minority and stack the courts with judicial progressives. Now the shoe's on the other foot, and the opportunity is ours.
That is - if we don't self-destruct, if we don't overreach, if we don't fall victim to the same hubris.
-
I see the following: McCain, Collins, Murkowski, and Graham as being the primary ones who jump across the aisle. McConnell isn't in any rush to push them back, from what I have seen, and has not pushed for sufficiently conservative legislation to take in the conservatives. It's poor leadership on his part.
There were promises made, and the American people expect them to be fulfilled. Failure will have consequences.
McConnell is leader of the swamp. His corruption has been on full display for quite awhile with the latest being his unwillingness to confirm nominees to the bench. There are 100 vacancies on the federal bench and 50 nominees awaiting action in the Senate and the number of federal court vacancies has risen to 149.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/10/mitch_mcconnell_gets_blamed_for_judicial_bottlenecking.html
-
McConnell is leader of the swamp. His corruption has been on full display for quite awhile with the latest being his unwillingness to confirm nominees to the bench. There are 100 vacancies on the federal bench and 50 nominees awaiting action in the Senate and the number of federal court vacancies has risen to 149.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/10/mitch_mcconnell_gets_blamed_for_judicial_bottlenecking.html
It should be apparent, even to the most ardent fans of the President, that McConnell has been a serious impediment to achieving Conservative goals in the Senate for some time, and has even been called a "Liar" on the Senate floor over it. While there is a power play going on, it could have some seriously good results if things go right.
-
It should be apparent, even to the most ardent fans of the President, that McConnell has been a serious impediment to achieving Conservative goals in the Senate for some time, and has even been called a "Liar" on the Senate floor over it. While there is a power play going on, it could have some seriously good results if things go right.
You would have to be both blind and deaf not to recognize it!
-
McConnell is leader of the swamp. His corruption has been on full display for quite awhile with the latest being his unwillingness to confirm nominees to the bench. There are 100 vacancies on the federal bench and 50 nominees awaiting action in the Senate and the number of federal court vacancies has risen to 149.
That's bullshit. McConnell has been working hard with Trump and White House Counsel Dan McGahn to get the President's nominees confirmed. He's kept the GOP coalition unified on judges, and in the words of Kimberly Stassel of the WSJ, has "a steely passion for remaking the judiciary" that past majority leaders like Trent Lott and Bill Frist have lacked. Her column in this morning's WSJ - "Scalias All the Way Down" is a must read on the progress that's being made to protect the Constitution under current Senate leadership.
-
That's bullshit. McConnell has been working hard with Trump and White House Counsel Dan McGahn to get the President's nominees confirmed. He's kept the GOP coalition unified on judges, and in the words of Kimberly Stassel of the WSJ, has "a steely passion for remaking the judiciary" that past majority leaders like Trent Lott and Bill Frist have lacked. Her column in this morning's WSJ - "Scalias All the Way Down" is a must read on the progress that's being made to protect the Constitution under current Senate leadership.
So ... are you disputing the fact that there are hundreds of open seats to the bench or are you disputing that fact that McConnell is a very poor leader or are you disputing the fact that he's a RINO?
-
Tell me again why the "moderates", as you call them, aren't more responsible for the current paralysis as the "extremists", as you call them?
Trump is the de facto party leader and with one or two exceptions it always seems to be the "moderates" obstructing him. Yet they never seem to be the target of your criticism.
Is that a tacit acknowledgment that Trump is pushing the country to the Right? If so, I agree. If not, never mind.
-
Here it is again. It’s all the noisy “extremists” fault, refusing to cooperate with the poor well intentioned moderates.
Those 'moderates' are nothing more than liberal, as they possess the same meme.
-
That's right! So why are so many folks clamoring to primary incumbents with Brietbart extremists?
Yep, lifted right out of the playbook for liberals. Extremist? That's what you and Pelosi call conservatives now?
-
I won't abandon the ship. You will.
I believe you. The liberal ship you are on will stay true to its word.
-
No, the bill that would have converted the ACA into something consistent with conservative notions of Constitutional federalism, and let the states innovate and decide how to design an insurance market that works for their citizens.
The "root and branch" repeal you demand is a fantasy. There is no majority for it, because the reality is that millions benefit from ObamaCare. Incremental change - in a conservative direction - is better than no change at all. You may not like it, but reality bites.
If there was so much so called benefit from it, why did the Congress exempt itself?
-
So ... are you disputing the fact that there are hundreds of open seats to the bench or are you disputing that fact that McConnell is a very poor leader or are you disputing the fact that he's a RINO?
IMO, McConnell is a main street conservative and an effective leader, albeit one who is mindful of Senate traditions and the reasons why protection of minority rights has, historically, been of great benefit to Republicans. He is working effectively with Trump's folks in getting his judicial nominees confirmed. The constant beat-down he suffers at the hands of the Breitbart extremists (yes, I'm sticking to that characterization, I am no fan of Steve Bannon and his cynical hatemongering) is, IMO, a travesty.
-
Yep, lifted right out of the playbook for liberals. Extremist? That's what you and Pelosi call conservatives now?
I am no liberal, sir. But I am no social conservative or alt-right racist either. I come from the conservative tradition of Barry Goldwater, Bill Buckley and Ronald Reagan. Heard of them? If that makes me a liberal, then kiss my ass.
-
I am no liberal, sir. But I am no social conservative or alt-right racist either. I come from the conservative tradition of Barry Goldwater, Bill Buckley and Ronald Reagan. Heard of them? If that makes me a liberal, then kiss my ass.
You say you are "no social conservative," then call yourself in the tradition of Ronald Reagan. Got it. *****rollingeyes*****
-
You say you are "no social conservative," then call yourself in the tradition of Ronald Reagan. Got it. *****rollingeyes*****
Absolutely correct, sir.
Reagan wanted to reduce the leviathan state. Social conservatives don't prioritize such things - indeed, they insist that the state enforce their peculiar morality as government policy. (To be fair, most conservatives combine aspects of the several conservative traditions (economic conservatism, liberty conservatism, social conservatism, etc.) Reagan certainly did. But you cannot claim Reagan as solely a "social conservative". He was far more supportive of individual liberty and limited government to be pigeonholed that way.)
-
If you say so. Just know you are not the first Briefer to cast him in your own image.