My nominee for line of the day: "I just feel like we could have done this significantly better," Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) said while watching Gaetz outside.
Is there not a tunnel that directly connects the Canon Building to the Capital? Also, wouldn’t a former high school principal, having conducted multiple fire drills, be familiar with how a fire alarm works?
I think from a campaigning perspective, if you’re the Democrats you vote against McCarthy and stand back and watch the implosion and probably repeat the close government shutdown situation in November. Could easily pin that on the Republicans.
From a “we’re here to run a country” perspective, you support McCarthy and get on with working on spending bills that can pass.
It would be a tough choice. I think I would go with the latter. But the former would probably be fun for them to watch.
As others have stated, any alternative to McCarthy could be worse. Am looking forward to your analysis of today, tomorrow morning. Scott McFarland seems nice enough but he doesn’t have your résumé.
You taught me years ago that earmarks are the best way for money to be allocated. As much of the budget as possible should have a congressional name or two attached. Otherwise anonymous federal executive branch employees will decide where money is spent.
If a ban for raises has been in place since 2009, why did "no raises" have to be explicitly added to what was passed on Saturday? Not that I think they should get a raise, just curious about the mechanics and why adding the language was such an issue.
Perhaps I’m reading in to this, but it seems the House Democrats are in a pretty good position to make some basic demands of Speaker McCarthy in exchange for bailing him out—things as basic as sending House-approved bills to the Senate. I suspect the Dems aren’t really champing at the bit to help McCarthy, but as Mr. Brock said above, the Devil you know...
"Stop the absurd drama," counseled Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Ah yes truth is stranger than fiction.
Depends on who the Dems might think would replace McCarthy. Maybe, at this point, the devil you know is better to keep than to discard.
My nominee for line of the day: "I just feel like we could have done this significantly better," Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL) said while watching Gaetz outside.
Ya think?
Is there not a tunnel that directly connects the Canon Building to the Capital? Also, wouldn’t a former high school principal, having conducted multiple fire drills, be familiar with how a fire alarm works?
I think that Democrats should be very careful since they could get someone in that seat that is worse.
Heck of a week, eh, Jamie?
I think from a campaigning perspective, if you’re the Democrats you vote against McCarthy and stand back and watch the implosion and probably repeat the close government shutdown situation in November. Could easily pin that on the Republicans.
From a “we’re here to run a country” perspective, you support McCarthy and get on with working on spending bills that can pass.
It would be a tough choice. I think I would go with the latter. But the former would probably be fun for them to watch.
As others have stated, any alternative to McCarthy could be worse. Am looking forward to your analysis of today, tomorrow morning. Scott McFarland seems nice enough but he doesn’t have your résumé.
You taught me years ago that earmarks are the best way for money to be allocated. As much of the budget as possible should have a congressional name or two attached. Otherwise anonymous federal executive branch employees will decide where money is spent.
If a ban for raises has been in place since 2009, why did "no raises" have to be explicitly added to what was passed on Saturday? Not that I think they should get a raise, just curious about the mechanics and why adding the language was such an issue.
Perhaps I’m reading in to this, but it seems the House Democrats are in a pretty good position to make some basic demands of Speaker McCarthy in exchange for bailing him out—things as basic as sending House-approved bills to the Senate. I suspect the Dems aren’t really champing at the bit to help McCarthy, but as Mr. Brock said above, the Devil you know...
Strange times, indeed.