Jim Jordon definitely does not want to be speaker and moreover says he won’t be the Speaker. I guess he feels that he’s good at what he does and knowing all the ramifications involved with a new position, he might feel that it’s out of his wheelhouse. Boebert made a statement saying that Washington didn’t want to be president either but sadly she forgot her history. Washington refused the position of the King. He did however eventually accept the position as President with limited powers.
Jordan said he is focused on chairing the Judiciary Committee and has no interest in being speaker. Traditionally, the Speaker does not serve on committees or participate in floor debate.
Uh-huh, there is that plus as a side, from what Mo Brooks was saying this morning, it takes something close to a million dollars to be the chair in many of the committees. He said that the chairs do not necessarily buy their own way in but rather, his or her constituents and lobbyists put up the money so backing away wouldn’t really be in the donor’s nor the Congressman’s best interests. Now, to be truthful, I have no idea what all that means. .
And the flip side of that has to do with whose transgressions see the light of day and whose get swept under [media] carpets. (Tell me again where Paul Pelosi and Hunter Biden stories got off to???)
Okay, I understand that the Republican Freedom Caucus wanted to meet with Kevin McCarthy this summer, or before the November elections, to see if he would promise to allow investigations into improprieties to go through. His response to them was that he didn't need their votes. Well, it seems that the Republicans didn't sweep in on a Red Wave as they might have expected, and now he does need their votes. Or perhaps he does. Rep. Matt Gaetz has heard that McCarthy has made a deal with the Democrats to the effect that enough of them would vote "present" to change the threshold of votes that he would need to get a majority. Although AOC has denied this when asked by Gaetz, it makes sense because McCarthy would be serving the interests of the Democrats, as he always has.
Good morning to all- Anyone who believes anything that vile piece of garbage Matt Gaetz says is begging to be bent over a barrel and treated badly- in a lot of ways. Matt Gaetz is beyond nasty. you all be safe and keep well- Ed
There is not much useful information in this post . Besides just giving a vulgarly expressed opinion about Gaetz, your post has no content. It would be nice if you could just explain what he has done that you think was not good, in an intelligent way, and not just keep posting rants about people you dislike, and actually add some information to the conversation.
Good morning to all- Yvonne Smith- With all due respect, my post was not a rant. If I had ranted, you would know it. There would be no doubt. And I expect in your eyes, anyone who does not hold the views you hold is ranting when he/she expresses an opinion different from yours. And if you think my statement was vulgar, you should check into the things Gaetz is accused of doing- involving underage girls and such goings on. Matt Gaetz is not worth wasting breath discussing. Defend him if you will- I will say no more. good day to all- Ed
How is a written discussion of your opinions about an individual wasting your “breath”? And…Yvonne hasn’t said one way or the other who she would really like to see as Speaker yet you made yet another assumption and accusation as to why she asked you to elaborate. Your opinions are honored just as anyone else’s are but opinions should be followed with a reason for those opinions. It’s just the way things should be done. To me, your post was exactly the same as your accusation regarding the Republicans acting like children and just because someone or many people in Congress express themselves with vulgarity doesn’t excuse you from doing it. So far as the indictment you made about underage girls, one should wait until the verdict is in before pronouncing guilt. The Democrat led DOJ has yet to find anything worth going to trial over but like everyone else, I’m waiting to see just how it will play out. I mean, it isn’t anything like the death toll around Hillary and Bill but still, if there’s justice to be done I like to see justice not hearsay nor politically based bias. Educators …..hmph…..
Got any evidence of something he actually did? Do you also think Trump was the evil doer so many have accused him of being?
I guess I can see why some might think implying someone should be spanked could be thought of as a personal attack. However, it is rather tongue in cheek humorous to me. I think it falls under Rule #2 (or is it 3?) of not being too easily offended. Especially if the person it is directed to hasn't complained about being offended (yet). I think this is a draw. A molehill, not a mountain. But providing links or quotations from others, particularly reporters, is frowned upon here. Only opinions are encouraged.
The person I admire most in this whole debacle is the House Clerk, Cheryl Johnson. She's done a great job of corraling the disruptive members.
I think a lot of the problems could be solved if they would take away the cameras from the House chamber. Until the House is sworn in, C-SPAN is allowed to scan the entire room, covering individual members. After they are sworn in and have a speaker, C-SPAN will be limited to covering only the main podium, I believe. Too many people looking for the cameras for attention, and campaigning for public view.
Other than stating the facts, you’ll notice that Yvonne doesn’t get into many debates whether she might be offended or not. That said, I am sorry but when one reads the addendum “in a lot of ways” in the sentence, as you well know. there are other things that do come to mind other than spanking and if that’s what Ed meant, he should have stated that.