Leading The Unleadable Into The Final Obama Showdown
It's hard not to have at least a little bit of sympathy for Kevin McCarthy, at this point. When Speaker of the House John Boehner announced he was going to step down, it was the equivalent of the chief engineer jumping off of a train that was barreling down the track, after just having passed a warning that the bridge ahead was washed out. What sane person would relish the chance to preside over an upcoming disaster, after all? McCarthy faced an unwinnable situation from his own ungovernable caucus, and so he intelligently threw up his hands and essentially said: "Why bother even trying?"
This is momentous, because it doesn't happen very often. In normal times, leading the House of Representatives is an honor that many vie for, because it is a powerful position usually only given to those with a long track record and demonstrable leadership qualities. Now we are left with the speaker's chair being the equivalent of a smoking hot potato -- nobody wants to get left holding it.
We've actually experienced a somewhat-similar situation, back in 1998. Newt Gingrich had to step down as speaker, after his ethics problems caught up to him (and after a disastrous government shutdown that Republicans were blamed for by the public). The replacement candidate, however, was taken down by his own hypocrisy. This was the middle of the impeachment idiocy, where a sitting president faced removal from office for sexual peccadilloes. Unfortunately, the man chosen to lead the Republican House after Newt's ignominious exit (Bob Livingston) had a sexual dalliance problem of his own -- which was helpfully pointed out by none other than Larry Flynt (see: "The Flynt Report" and its aftermath). There are two major differences about today's situation and 1998, though. The first is that back then Livingston walked away from a job he really wanted, due to his own misbehavior. The second is that the shutdown helped force the sitting speaker out, rather than being just over the horizon.
Congress faces several self-induced "crises" over the next few months. The temporary budget agreement Boehner struck will expire in mid-December. The credit ceiling must be raised in early November. These (and other) large compromises must be struck in the near future, or America will face either a government shutdown or a federal debt default. Once again, fiscal cliffs loom. And the majority party in the House is at war with itself over how to proceed.
This entire fiasco is nothing short of a vindication of Boehner's exit, in fact. Boehner had grown tired of trying to square a circle, over and over again. He let the Tea Party backbenchers rant and rave to their hearts' content, and then he tried to step in and clean up the wreckage as best he could. Time after time, Boehner was not thanked for doing so, instead he was excoriated for cutting any sort of deal short of complete adherence to the (extensive) list of demands from the radicals. He got tired of being continually kicked around for doing his job, and he finally said: "Enough!"
Now that Boehner himself is out of the picture, we can all see with complete clarity the battle lines within the Republican Party. They have what should be an overwhelming advantage in the House -- more seats than they've held since before World War II, if memory serves. Even with such a huge majority, though, there are enough Tea Partiers to deny the speaker a majority on any vote they deem insufficiently pure. Because of this, Boehner could accomplish little. Because of this, any speaker at this juncture in time will also be able to accomplish very little indeed. Which is why nobody currently wants the job.
What happens now is anybody's guess. The suggestions and rumors are already running rampant. My favorite so far is to bring back Newt Gingrich as speaker -- he knows a thing or two about raucous caucuses, right? There is no constitutional requirement for the speaker to be a member of the House, so in theory they could pick anybody. How about a rotating speakership where each of the GOP presidential candidates gets to take a crack at leading the Republicans for a week? That would certainly be entertaining. If no sitting Representative can corral the necessary 218 votes from his or her caucus, perhaps Boehner will have to stick it out whether he likes the idea or not. Or maybe a few Republicans will break ranks and vote for Nancy Pelosi? Stranger things have happened. The current idea floating around (no, seriously) is that Republicans will elect some sort of "interim speaker" to get them through until after the 2016 elections, when they will then elect a "real" speaker.
This is how far the Republicans have sunk. Nobody wants the job -- even on a temporary basis -- of trying to herd the House Republican cat stampede. It's an impossible task, and everyone knows it. Some are even suggesting this could lead to a complete schism as either (1) the Establishment Republicans jettison the Tea Partiers completely from their party, or (2) the Establishment Republicans walk away from the Republican Party and form their own, more centrist (or perhaps "more sane") Conservative Party. While this would certainly clarify things, I kind of doubt it'll happen quite yet. I think they've got a few elections yet to lose before this actually comes to pass.
But then what do I know? I certainly might have foreseen a situation where John Boehner got so exasperated that he stepped down, but I never in a million years could have predicted that the job of speaker of the House would be considered so radioactive that Republicans would actively run away from it, fleeing the horror of trying to govern their own party. Even Newt Gingrich never took the Republican Party that far, and that's saying something.
The Tea Partiers cannot do basic math. They are doomed to irrelevancy, whether they realize it or not. They can pass the purest legislation they can dream up -- using fear to drag along all the other House Republicans -- but any such bill will never make it to the Senate floor, much less Obama's desk. Those are the hard, cold facts. Thirty or forty House Republicans cannot bend the rest of the government to their will. If they'd ever take the time to read those copies of the Constitution they cart around with them, they'd understand why. Unfortunately for them, they got elected by promising their voters an impossibility. Like any wild animal backed into a corner, they've only got what might be called the "Cornered Rabid Wolverine tactic" left: Attack! Attack! Attack!
This is the core reason the Tea Partiers are so ungovernable. Either they've drunk the Kool-Aid themselves, or they've just overpromised their voters the moon, the sun, and the sky. Their reasoning (if it can even be called that) goes something like: "If we refuse to pass anything short of 100 percent of our agenda, and swear we won't vote on anything else -- if we just fight long enough and hard enough -- then eventually the Senate Democrats will see the error of their ways and then President Obama will sign away major portions of his own legacy." This is completely cuckoo-bananas insane on the face of it, but that's the promise they made to their voters. It's how they got elected. And it's why they're completely immune to logic, reasoning, or hard cold math. Mothers of toddlers will recognize this as the "I'm going to hold my breath until I turn blue" tactic, which (again, any mother can confirm) never actually works.
No wonder nobody wants the job of "leading" them. It's not only a thankless task, it is becoming a downright impossible one. Even more so when you consider that we're not just approaching a bunch of fiscal cliffs, but in fact these will likely be the last such self-induced crises during President Obama's time in office. Whatever deals eventually get struck will -- by design -- carry us through until after the 2016 election, since neither party wants a shutdown fight right before nest year's election. So, in a way, the next two months are really the last big fight the Tea Partiers will ever get to have with their hated nemesis Obama. Who among us would want to try to referee that dogfight? I don't blame McCarthy one bit from walking away from it, in fact. It's probably the smartest thing he's ever done.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Hey CW
There must millions of Americans who have recently realized that they are indeed qualified for the job of congresscritter.
Let's hope some of them take the plunge and we get some new blood.
It's hard not to laugh at the current mess, but there's also an uneasy feeling because these numbnuts appear capable of making the mess a whole lot bigger.
A
Yep.
Who'd be a politician today? I know nobody who I know personally and respect as a leader who is remotely interested in the job.
So why does a Speaker candidate feel so compelled to continue to observe the so-called Hastert Rule? If Spkr. Boehner or McCarthy were to simply relax on that approach, wouldn't they leave the 40 in the Freedom Caucus less powerful? That still leaves most of the Republicans directing legislation and so its not like the Democrats get their way on everything, though it of course means some negotiation. Wouldn't this just be a return to how the House used to govern itself before, well, Hastert?
It seems even if the Freedom Caucus kept trying to remove the speaker, they'd never succeed if the rest of the Rs just decided not to vote on the question.
I'm sure I'm being too simplistic (even pollyanna), but it's gotta be better for them as an overall conference than what they're putting themselves through right now.
Hi neil
Very true.
Working with those people would suck.
But your average dog catcher or retailer has the skills to do a better job than they can manage.
Plus, there's a good health plan and lots of vacation... and a possibility for promotion for doing nothing.
A
Kudos to CW for not bowing to pressure (internal or external) and mentioning that totally bogus claim of what McCarthy said about the Benghazi hearings..
:D
That particular horse has been milked for all it's worth and that particular cow has been beat to death..
Michale
RD,
So why does a Speaker candidate feel so compelled to continue to observe the so-called Hastert Rule?
For the same reason that the other side of the aisle feels so compelled to do stoopid stuff..
Party Uber Alles
Neil,
First off..
"WELCOME TO THE PARTY, PAL!!!"
-John McClane, DIE HARD
:D
Who'd be a politician today? I know nobody who I know personally and respect as a leader who is remotely interested in the job.
And therein lies the conundrum.
And not the Frank Parker kind...
The people that WOULD be good leaders want nothing to do with politics...
It's only the greedy narcissistic loons who want to "save the world" that want the power of political so-called "leadership".
I have saids its befores and I'll says it agains ad nasuem...
There is no difference between a Democrat or a Republican. They are both nothing but politicians which, in my book, puts them barely above cockroaches or those sticker-thingies that get into your socks when you walk thru a field..
Michale
The Tea Partiers cannot do basic math. They are doomed to irrelevancy, whether they realize it or not.
The Left has been predicting the "irrelevancy" of the Tea Party for quite a few years now...
The Left has as good of a track record as I have predicting SCOTUS rulings...
And the same thing drives those predictions..
Wish-casting... :D
Michale
Hay CW,
The suggestions and rumors are already running rampant. My favorite so far is to bring back Newt Gingrich as speaker -- he knows a thing or two about raucous caucuses, right? There is no constitutional requirement for the speaker to be a member of the House, so in theory they could pick anybody.
What do you think about a BiPartisan Commission of Democrats and Republicans choosing the next Speaker??
Biga's bigotry (heh :D) notwithstanding, it would seem to me that, if Democrats are truly about compromise and putting country before Party, they would jump at the chance to work with Republicans towards MEANINGFUL bi-partisanship, eh??
But I am sure Biga speaks for all of the Left with his opposition to it..
Which simply proves what I have always said is 1000% factual..
For the Democrat Party, "compromise" means "Our Way Or The Highway"
:^/
Michale
"Some are even suggesting this could lead to a complete schism as either (1) the Establishment Republicans jettison the Tea Partiers completely from their party, or (2) the Establishment Republicans walk away from the Republican Party and form their own, more centrist (or perhaps "more sane") Conservative Party."
As a purely practical matter, how would the Establishment Wing purge the TP? What rule(s) has(ve) been broken? I suspect none, but even if an actionable infraction could be found, expulsion proceedings would require a nasty national fight plus nasty fights in all 50 state parties plus territories. There would be a STRONG potential for litigation (assets to be divided) in every venue. If the purge is successful, the ER can't actually kick black balled TP members out of office. All the EW can do is cabal with the Democrats to elect a more flexible House o' Reps Leadership willing to lead somewhere, as opposed to lead nowhere....which they can already cabal without kicking out any TP. There is some risk to this, but nearly all Congressional Districts are quite safe for their incumbents.
Option 2, walking away and forming a new party would be easier than option 1, but again, they can accomplish about the same thing just by simply working with the Democrats. Less ugly, less cleanup.
I think it fair to say that one of the untended consequences of the US Constitution is that We (The People) are stuck with what is for all intents and purposes a two party system of governance plus organized obstructionists and vocal complainers. The only viable option is to wall them off, like oysters do to a grain of sand, producing a smooth, shiny pearl. Oysters are just about the dumbest things on Earth...but at least they know how to deal with irritation. Unlike...
Over at the HuffPO, the issue of sexual black(e)mail is being raised as the reason for McCarthy's unexpected decision. Pretty good evidence for the blackmail, but nothing to back up the underlying accusation that McCarthy had an affair ongoing or in his past.
Over at the HuffPO, the issue of sexual black(e)mail is being raised as the reason for McCarthy's unexpected decision. Pretty good evidence for the blackmail, but nothing to back up the underlying accusation that McCarthy had an affair ongoing or in his past.
It's also interesting to note that the Wiki entry that started the accusation was posted from a Homeland Security Dept IP address..
I guess Obama didn't want McCarthy to be Speaker or Hillary was retaliating for McCarthy speaking the facts regarding the Benghazi Hearings..
Michale
All Eyes on Paul Ryan for Speaker
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.lemondrop.co.uk/media/2010/08/munsters.jpg
Jack Bauer for Speaker Of The House!!!
:D
Michale
M-12
Steve Baer, Republican donor is the source of the E-mails to congressional reps.
The Wikipedia edit is just a red herring. This sort of Wiki-mischief occurs all the time.
The real pressure on McCarthy was the carefully targeted E-mails by a Republican to Republicans.
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/256475-gop-lawmakers-confronted-mccarthy
The Wikipedia edit is just a red herring.
Ahhhh.. So Democrats are completely blameless. :^/
This sort of Wiki-mischief occurs all the time.
I guess that makes it OK then... At least when it's the Left doing the mischief.... :^/
I guess when it's Righty mischief (Abu Ghraib anyone??) the crescendo from the Left is justified... :^/
Just once, I would like to see, "Yer right Michale... The Left frak'ed up and frak'ed up big time.."
Ahh perchance to dream.. :)
Michale
m-16
You want more distraction? Glad to oblige.
Why would you assume a Democrat put the offending edit into WikiP? Do IP addresses include party affiliation? I don't think they do. Is the Pentagon staffed exclusively by Democrats? Not likely. Do people ever sneak onto a coworkers computer? Just possibly.
Did the Wiki edit make members of the House o' Reps cry? Not likely.
But enough distractions.
Just use some common sense. If you want to start an effective smear campaign, which approach is going be more effective? Plan A: Put an obscure reference into WikiP and hope somebody in Congress stumbles over it. Plan B: just send an E-mail directly to the Representative you are trying to influence. Would the Mafia threaten it's competition by editing WikiP articles? They would not. They throw a bloody horse head in the competitions bed...where it is certain to attract attention from the right person.
If you want/need validation, try a Republican blog. On the other hand, if you want actual debate, well CW.com is the place.
You want more distraction? Glad to oblige.</I.
No... I want consistency..
Why would you assume a Democrat put the offending edit into WikiP? Do IP addresses include party affiliation? I don't think they do. Is the Pentagon staffed exclusively by Democrats? Not likely. Do people ever sneak onto a coworkers computer? Just possibly.
Who benefits by a messed up Republican Party???
Only one suspect...
If you want/need validation, try a Republican blog.
BTDT.. I got kicked out because I defended Democrats too much.. Plus I committed the most cardinal sin of all.
I voted for Obama.. :D
On the other hand, if you want actual debate, well CW.com is the place.
One would think so..
Yet, all we hear...
GOP EVIL TERRORISTS
DEMOCRAT PARTY AS PURE AS THE DRIVEN SNOW
Now if you want to call that "actual debate", well......
The only debate around here is, is Obama awesome or really REALLY awesome..
Are the GOP terrorists??? or really EVIL terrorists??
Again, I don't consider that actual debate...
Actual debate BEGINS at "Maybe Democrats ARE frak'ed" rather than "Democrats... PERFECT.. NOW let's debate"...
Credit where credit is due.. You (and a couple like you) come closer than anyone else...
But to actually have a debate, one must first concede that they MIGHT be wrong and that their open MIGHT be right...
Anything less isn't debate... It's preaching...
But it's the bear I must cross.... Or something like that. :D
Michale
But to actually have a debate, one must first concede that they MIGHT be wrong and that their open MIGHT be right...
Grrrrrr
But to actually have a debate, one must first concede that they MIGHT be wrong and that their OPPONENT MIGHT be right...
Michale
Just use some common sense. If you want to start an effective smear campaign, which approach is going be more effective? Plan A: Put an obscure reference into WikiP and hope somebody in Congress stumbles over it. Plan B: just send an E-mail directly to the Representative you are trying to influence. Would the Mafia threaten it's competition by editing WikiP articles? They would not. They throw a bloody horse head in the competitions bed...where it is certain to attract attention from the right person.
This assumes a level of intelligence not proven in your run o the mill political bigot...
I mean, seriously... How much "intelligence" can you expect from political bigots who refer to political opponents as "terrorists" **SOLELY** because of political differences??
I axe ya....
Michale
That came out a little harsher than I intended..
It was meant in the spirit of this CW commentary..
http://www.chrisweigant.com/2012/08/27/embracing-bigotry/
My apologies if anyone (mostly) was offended.. :D
Michale
Micha
A Repub is gloating about sending the email about McCarthy and you are back to whataboutery trying to finger Dems?
Did you notice all the "centrist" Dems jumping at that bi-partisan commission to select the new Speaker idea? How about all the openly right wingers? How about all the Repubs in general?
Nope, nobody has noticed because the support just doesn't exist.
Sometimes bad ideas are just bad ideas, and the lack of enthusiasm for them says nothing at all about the ideology of the unenthused. And, since pretty much all the ideas you support are bad ideas, the lack of enthusiasm for you and those ideas is shared broadly across much of the political spectrum.
But, since you made me the spokesperson for the Left here (I humble accept the nomination), my first announcement is that only delusional wingnut trolls are ignorant enough to conflate the Left with the Democratic party.
We do however hope to expand on the little bit of influence we have maintained on them to include economic and foreign policy in the near future.
As our ideas are broadly popular across the political spectrum, we further hope to regain national influence beyond the party structure.
For example-
- 75% of Americans support expanding Social Security benefits so seniors can meet their basic needs
- 71% of Americans support free higher educations for ALL qualified students
- 61% of Americans support breaking up the Too Big To Fail banks
For further examples and other broadly popular policies and how to achieve them, please visit the website of Bernie Sanders... and/or check back here for further announcements.
Thank you
altohone
Whoops
(I humbly accept the nomination) that is.
A
A Repub is gloating about sending the email about McCarthy and you are back to whataboutery trying to finger Dems?
Department Of Homeland Security is investigating why someone from the DHS posted the Wiki..
I realize in your world Democrats are as pure as the driven snow and Republicans are evil terrorists..
Here in the real world, the facts are quite different..
But hay.. Who am I to rip apart your fantasies. :D
Michale
For further examples and other broadly popular policies and how to achieve them, please visit the website of Bernie Sanders... and/or check back here for further announcements.
Sanders has as much chance of being elected POTUS as Trump does..
But it doesn't surprise me that you support Sanders.. He is probably a Truther too.. :D
Michale
Micha
Unlike what you claim about Repubs, I actually rip on Dems constantly... you don't have to look far to find it... in fact, you still owe me the apology you weaseled out of dealing with this very subject. I've said it before, but lying to cover your lies gets you nowhere... the nowhere where nobody will believe anything you write. Once a liar, always a liar.
But you're still trying to change the subject away from the internal Repub fight led by Repubs against Repubs... trollery that exposes your inability to defend those engaged in a circular firing squad.
Back to lying about the truther thing too?
If that's all you've got against the policies supported by huge majorities of Americans, you may be in for a rude awakening.
Your blatant dishonesty is typical of your ilk, but it's a horrible example of LEO's in this country... they wouldn't want anything to do with even a former one like you with such little integrity... or at least one stupid enough not to care about getting caught repeatedly.
Pathetic as always.
A