#GOP Obstructionism

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Jess Piper at The View from Rural Missouri Substack:

When I scanned the code, it took me straight to a Google drive. I was hesitant immediately. The first folder in the drive is titled, “Arkansas Abortion Amendment Myth vs. Fact” and that was pretty much a dead giveaway; the lady stopping folks headed to an event intent on signing the abortion petition was going to hit them with disinformation first.

Another folder in the Google drive was something called “Decline to Sign.” This graphic included bulleted points. Among them: *No licensing for healthcare professionals at abortion medical facilities. *No ultrasound required before an abortion to determine fetal age and location. *Would make it harder to combat sex trafficking and child abuse. *No health and safety standards imposed on abortion clinics. Wow. That was a lot of weird and incorrect information. I would think a doctor would know the location of a fetus, and forcing a person who has been sex trafficked into delivering a pregnancy is just about the most disgusting and cruel act I can imagine. The rest of the points are at least stretching the truth if not flat out lies. Was the woman standing in that parking lot just some solitary extremist trying to dissuade voters from signing a petition? Some woman who got a crazy idea, created a Google drive, printed up cardstock with a QR code, and decided to lie to folks on their way to sign a petition in a small town in Arkansas?

No. “Decline to Sign” is a coordinated movement and we saw it in Missouri as well. It is well-funded and not at all grassroots. They have signs, sites, and lawmakers who are bought and paid for to do their dirty work. I noticed “Decline to Sign” popping up on social media from Missouri GOP State Senators and Representatives. The messaging was exactly the same. Some Reps even started tweeting out videos of themselves, sitting on the same couch in front of the same bookcase, reading a script about “out of state” folks coming to Missouri to gather signatures and steal identities or allow abortions up to birth. It was creepy because it was so scripted and the deliveries were so automated. The politicians also had those dead eyes you need to straight up lie to someone. I’m not exaggerating when I tell you it is Orwellian. Nearly the exact same words were seeping from the dry mouths of several extremist Missouri lawmakers.

There were nearly a dozen who were recruited for the videos, but here are just three examples: Senator Mary Elizabeth Coleman, Representative Doug Richey and Representative Justin Sparks. Each one took their time to stare into the camera and lie about the abortion petition. The videos gave me chills and let me know we are up against a machine that wants to take away bodily autonomy from everyone, and keep us from fighting back with ballot measures to return bodily autonomy. The good news? Missourians had just over 90 days to gather 180,000 signatures to put abortion on the ballot. Friends, we collected 380,000 signatures! Read that again…we gathered over 200k more signatures than we needed to put the measure on the ballot in November. We still have obstacles to returning bodily autonomy to Missourians, though. The GOP is planning to take away one person, one vote and strip us of the ability to pass Constitutional amendments. They are planning to take away a simple majority vote to pass amendments. That will be a disaster for Missourians and I’ll write more on it in another post.

Jess Piper writes on her Substack the deceptive "decline to sign" movement touted by anti-abortion extremists.

[faultfalha]

It seemed as though the debate had been designed to amplify the silent yet relentless threat of climate denial. It was as if some deep-seated current had been running throughout the whole building, one that surged toward a kind of frenzied paroxysm. There were slices of knowledge so thin they seemed impossible to hold onto, as though the atmosphere was too rigid to allow such breathing space. With this strange tension in the air, the question of climate change would somehow be asked in spite of the obfuscation - the only direct answer was a now-infamous blankness of understanding. All around, the spectre of ignorance seemed to be growing more and more powerful, a looming entity that thought it was immune to accountability. It was a sadly fitting scene for the first Republican Presidential Debate and its devastating repudiation of scientific fact.

[glvlvukcan]

What Could Happen

(SOPA Images / Getty)

 

View in browser

Ukraine is fighting for the lives of its people and its very existence, and it is running out of ammunition. If the United States does not step back in with aid, Russia could eventually win this war.

Despite the twaddle from propagandists in Moscow (and a few academics in the United States), Russia’s war is not about NATO, or borders, or the balance of power. The Russian dictator Vladimir Putin intends to absorb Ukraine into a new Russian empire, and he will eradicate the Ukrainians if they refuse to accept his rule. Europe is in the midst of the largest war on the continent since Nazi panzers rolled from Norway to Greece, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine is by far the most important threat to world peace since the worst days of the Cold War. In a less febrile political era, defeating Russia would be the top priority of every American politician.

The Republicans in Congress, however, remain fixated both on their hatred of Ukraine and on their affection for Russia. Their relentless criticism of assistance to Kyiv has had its intended effect, taking a bite out of the American public’s support for continuing aid, especially as the war has been crowded out by the torrent of more recent news, including Donald Trump’s endless legal troubles and Israel’s campaign in Gaza.

And so it’s time to think more seriously about what might happen if the Republicans succeed in this irresponsible effort to blockade any further assistance to Ukraine. The collapse and dismemberment of a nation of millions is immediately at stake, and that should be enough for any American to be appalled at the GOP’s obstructionism. But the peace of the world itself could rest on what Congress does—or does not do—next.

First, what would it even mean for Russia to “win”? A Russian victory does not require sending Moscow’s tanks into Kyiv, even if that were possible. (The Russians have taken immense losses in manpower and armor, and they would have to fight house-to-house as they approached the capital.) Putin is reckless and a poor strategist, but he is not stupid: He knows that he doesn’t need to plant the Russian flag on the Mother Ukraine statue just yet. He can instead tear Ukraine apart, piece by piece.

The destruction of Ukraine would begin with some kind of cease-fire offered by a Ukrainian leadership that has literally run out of bullets, bombs, and bodies. (The average age of Ukraine’s soldiers is already over 40; there are not that many more men to draft.) The Russians would signal a willingness to deal only with a new Ukrainian regime, perhaps some “government of national salvation” that would exist solely to save whatever would be left of a rump Ukrainian state in the western part of the country while handing everything else over to the Kremlin.

The Russians would then dictate more terms: The United States and NATO would be told to pound sand. Ukraine would have to destroy its weapons and convert its sizable army into a small and weak constabulary force. Areas under Russian control would become, by fiat, parts of Russia. The remaining thing called “Ukraine” would be a demilitarized puppet state, kept from integration of any kind with Europe; in a few years, an internal putsch or a Russian-led coup could produce a new government that would request final union with the Russian Federation. Soon, Ukraine would be part of a new Russian superstate, with Russian forces on NATO’s borders as “peacekeepers” or “border guards,” a ploy the Russians have used in Central Asia since the 1990s.

Imagine the world as Putin (and other dictators, including in China) might see it even a few years from now if Russia wins in 2024: America stood by, paralyzed and shamed, as Ukraine was torn to pieces, as millions of people and many thousands of square miles were added to the Kremlin’s empire, and as U.S. alliances in Europe and then around the world quietly disintegrated—all of which will be even more of a delight in Moscow and Beijing if Americans decide to add the ultimate gift of voting the ignorant and isolationist Trump back into the White House.

The real danger for the U.S. and Europe would begin after Ukraine is crushed, when only NATO would remain as the final barrier to Putin’s dreams of evolving into a new emperor of Eurasia. Putin has never accepted the legitimate existence of Ukraine, but like the unreformed Soviet nostalgist that he is, he has a particular hatred for NATO. After the collapse of Ukraine, he would want to take bolder steps to prove that the Atlantic Alliance is an illusion, a lie promulgated by cowards who would never dare to stop the Kremlin from reclaiming its former Soviet and Russian imperial possessions.

Reckless and emboldened, emotional and facing his own mortality, Putin would be tempted to extend his winning streak and try one last throw of the dice, this time against NATO itself. He would not try to invade all of Europe; he would instead seek to replicate the success of his 2014 capture of Crimea—only this time on NATO territory. Putin might, for example, declare that his commitment to the Russian-speaking peoples of the former Soviet Union compels him to defend Russians in one of the Baltic states. After some Kremlin-sponsored agitation close to the Russian border, Russian forces (including more of the special forces known as “little green men”) might seize a small piece of territory and call it a Russian “safe zone” or “haven”—violating NATO sovereignty while also sticking it to the West for similar attempts many years ago, using similar terms, to protect the Bosnians from Russia’s friends, the Serbs.

The Kremlin would then sit on this piece of NATO territory, daring America and Europe to respond, in order to prove that NATO lacks the courage to fight for its members, and that whatever the strength of the alliance between, say, Washington and London, no one is going to die—or risk nuclear war—for some town in Estonia.

Should Putin actually do any of this, however, he would be making a drastic mistake. Dictators continually misunderstand democracies, believing them to be weak and unwilling to fight. Democracies, including the United States, do hate to fight—until roused to action. Republicans might soon succeed in forcing the United States to abandon Ukraine, but if fighting breaks out in Europe between Russia and America’s closest allies—old and new—no one, not even a President Trump, who has expressed his hostility to NATO and professed his admiration for Putin, is going to be able to keep the United States out of the battle, not least because U.S. forces will inevitably be among NATO’s casualties.

And at that point, anything could happen. The world, should Russia win, will face remarkable new dangers—and for what? Because in 2024 some astonishingly venal and ambitious politicians wanted to hedge their bets and kiss Trump’s ring one more time? Perhaps enough Republicans will come to their senses in time to avert these possible outcomes. If they do not, future historians—that is, if anyone is left to record what happened—will be perplexed at how a small coterie of American politicians were so willing to trade the safety of the planet for a few more years of power.

From The Atlanic Newsletter Feb 9th 2024

[mariacallous]

What Could Happen

Ukraine is fighting for the lives of its people and its very existence, and it is running out of ammunition. If the United States does not step back in with aid, Russia could eventually win this war.

Despite the twaddle from propagandists in Moscow (and a few academics in the United States), Russia’s war is not about NATO, or borders, or the balance of power. The Russian dictator Vladimir Putin intends to absorb Ukraine into a new Russian empire, and he will eradicate the Ukrainians if they refuse to accept his rule. Europe is in the midst of the largest war on the continent since Nazi panzers rolled from Norway to Greece, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine is by far the most important threat to world peace since the worst days of the Cold War. In a less febrile political era, defeating Russia would be the top priority of every American politician.

The Republicans in Congress, however, remain fixated both on their hatred of Ukraine and on their affection for Russia. Their relentless criticism of assistance to Kyiv has had its intended effect, taking a bite out of the American public’s support for continuing aid, especially as the war has been crowded out by the torrent of more recent news, including Donald Trump’s endless legal troubles and Israel’s campaign in Gaza.

And so it’s time to think more seriously about what might happen if the Republicans succeed in this irresponsible effort to blockade any further assistance to Ukraine. The collapse and dismemberment of a nation of millions is immediately at stake, and that should be enough for any American to be appalled at the GOP’s obstructionism. But the peace of the world itself could rest on what Congress does—or does not do—next.

First, what would it even mean for Russia to “win”? A Russian victory does not require sending Moscow’s tanks into Kyiv, even if that were possible. (The Russians have taken immense losses in manpower and armor, and they would have to fight house-to-house as they approached the capital.) Putin is reckless and a poor strategist, but he is not stupid: He knows that he doesn’t need to plant the Russian flag on the Mother Ukraine statue just yet. He can instead tear Ukraine apart, piece by piece.

The destruction of Ukraine would begin with some kind of cease-fire offered by a Ukrainian leadership that has literally run out of bullets, bombs, and bodies. (The average age of Ukraine’s soldiers is already over 40; there are not that many more men to draft.) The Russians would signal a willingness to deal only with a new Ukrainian regime, perhaps some “government of national salvation” that would exist solely to save whatever would be left of a rump Ukrainian state in the western part of the country while handing everything else over to the Kremlin.

The Russians would then dictate more terms: The United States and NATO would be told to pound sand. Ukraine would have to destroy its weapons and convert its sizable army into a small and weak constabulary force. Areas under Russian control would become, by fiat, parts of Russia. The remaining thing called “Ukraine” would be a demilitarized puppet state, kept from integration of any kind with Europe; in a few years, an internal putsch or a Russian-led coup could produce a new government that would request final union with the Russian Federation. Soon, Ukraine would be part of a new Russian superstate, with Russian forces on NATO’s borders as “peacekeepers” or “border guards,” a ploy the Russians have used in Central Asia since the 1990s.

Imagine the world as Putin (and other dictators, including in China) might see it even a few years from now if Russia wins in 2024: America stood by, paralyzed and shamed, as Ukraine was torn to pieces, as millions of people and many thousands of square miles were added to the Kremlin’s empire, and as U.S. alliances in Europe and then around the world quietly disintegrated—all of which will be even more of a delight in Moscow and Beijing if Americans decide to add the ultimate gift of voting the ignorant and isolationist Trump back into the White House.

The real danger for the U.S. and Europe would begin after Ukraine is crushed, when only NATO would remain as the final barrier to Putin’s dreams of evolving into a new emperor of Eurasia. Putin has never accepted the legitimate existence of Ukraine, but like the unreformed Soviet nostalgist that he is, he has a particular hatred for NATO. After the collapse of Ukraine, he would want to take bolder steps to prove that the Atlantic Alliance is an illusion, a lie promulgated by cowards who would never dare to stop the Kremlin from reclaiming its former Soviet and Russian imperial possessions.

Reckless and emboldened, emotional and facing his own mortality, Putin would be tempted to extend his winning streak and try one last throw of the dice, this time against NATO itself. He would not try to invade all of Europe; he would instead seek to replicate the success of his 2014 capture of Crimea—only this time on NATO territory. Putin might, for example, declare that his commitment to the Russian-speaking peoples of the former Soviet Union compels him to defend Russians in one of the Baltic states. After some Kremlin-sponsored agitation close to the Russian border, Russian forces (including more of the special forces known as “little green men”) might seize a small piece of territory and call it a Russian “safe zone” or “haven”—violating NATO sovereignty while also sticking it to the West for similar attempts many years ago, using similar terms, to protect the Bosnians from Russia’s friends, the Serbs.

The Kremlin would then sit on this piece of NATO territory, daring America and Europe to respond, in order to prove that NATO lacks the courage to fight for its members, and that whatever the strength of the alliance between, say, Washington and London, no one is going to die—or risk nuclear war—for some town in Estonia.

Should Putin actually do any of this, however, he would be making a drastic mistake. Dictators continually misunderstand democracies, believing them to be weak and unwilling to fight. Democracies, including the United States, do hate to fight—until roused to action. Republicans might soon succeed in forcing the United States to abandon Ukraine, but if fighting breaks out in Europe between Russia and America’s closest allies—old and new—no one, not even a President Trump, who has expressed his hostility to NATO and professed his admiration for Putin, is going to be able to keep the United States out of the battle, not least because U.S. forces will inevitably be among NATO’s casualties.

And at that point, anything could happen.

The world, should Russia win, will face remarkable new dangers—and for what? Because in 2024 some astonishingly venal and ambitious politicians wanted to hedge their bets and kiss Trump’s ring one more time? Perhaps enough Republicans will come to their senses in time to avert these possible outcomes. If they do not, future historians—that is, if anyone is left to record what happened—will be perplexed at how a small coterie of American politicians were so willing to trade the safety of the planet for a few more years of power.

[thatstormygeek]

There are a number of reasons the GOP feels so much more awful now than they used to. Looking back at policy decisions and communications, we can see that the party itself has always Been Like This as far as their goals. But it just seems so much worse now, yeah?

Of course, we have the 24/7 news channels that have to fill air and are always begging for ratings. Then there's Fox News and its even more terrible children, so they are saying out loud a lot of stuff that used to be kept to closed meetings and whatnot. On top of that, add Donald Trump and the way he somehow turned so many of the most vocal Republicans into his clones, every one of which is in a race to see who can be the worstest person ever.

This article clarified another aspect to me that must be thrown in the mix.

Back in the day, the impression I had of most rank and file Republicans was that they just sort of did their jobs and let the party leaders do a lot of the fighting stuff out, at least in public. Again, this may be a matter of visibility rather than actual increase, but...I dunno. Obstructionism has trickled down throughout the party.

Do y'all remember Kim Davis? Back in 2015 when she refused to hand out marriage licenses to same sex couples, it was kind of a big deal. Everybody was talking about it. Can you even imagine that breaking into the top 10 news stories today?

Back to the article I was talking about above (emphasis mine):

Baumgardner questioned legality of exchanges several months ago when task force members solicited signatures for a letter to Williams demanding she call the first meeting of the task force. Williams relented three months later, permitting a two-hour meeting of the Special Education and Related Services Funding Task Force. She scheduled it for the final business day before opening the 2024 Legislature on Monday.

Kristey Williams is a Republican state representative in the Kansas Legislature. She was in charge of a task force "created by the Kansas Legislature to resolve funding challenges in K-12 special education." And she had to be begged to even allow the task force to begin to meet.

Because that's a key part of GOP "governing" strategy these days: refuse to do anything and then paint the Democrats as power-hungry, wannabe dictators when they have to find creative solutions to work around the Toddler Party.

When the task force finally did meet and elect leaders who were interested in it actually succeeding at its mission, in a move that surprised no one, a separate Republican went for another avenue of obstruction:

Sen. Molly Baumgardner, a Louisburg Republican who voted against Haas’ appointment, said she was concerned the Kansas Open Meetings Act had been violated. She asserted members of the task force engaged in behind-the-scene negotiations to lay groundwork for election of Haas and Winn.

Despite the fact that Williams refused to even schedule a meeting, Baumgardner insists that all communications regarding this task force should have taken place in public at the Capitol. Which would be part of the point of having a fucking meeting in the first place.

The four Republican legislators on the task force opposed the motion to embrace the state Board of Education’s strategy. However, an overwhelming majority of education organizations, teachers, administrators and others who testified at the hearing asked the task force and Legislature to comply with law promising districts 92% of excess costs incurred for teaching special education. The standard was inserted into Kansas statute in 2005, but the figure had been an informal goal of the Legislature and state Board of Education since the 1990s. Kansas hasn’t hit the mark since 2011.

Predictably, once the meeting did happen, the GOP members didn't want to actually do anything. Because they aren't interested in actually addressing the issue of special education funding in Kansas. They are interested in being Republicans. That's it. That's their job now.

Again, a hell of a lot of teachers and educational organizations are pushing for more funding. To complete the obstruction hat trick, a Koch toady chimed in:

Debate in Kansas about special education funding was tangled in misperception, said Dave Trabert, who serves as CEO of the Kansas Policy Institute. He said existing state methods and formulas didn’t fully account for tax dollars devoted to special education. Some Kansas districts receive more than 92%, while others get less. “If it is all counted, then special education is overfunded,” he said. “We would suggest you fix the formula that distributes the money because, as we’ve mentioned, some 135 districts actually got more than 92% last school year. We also suggest that you fix the formula so that all of the money related to special education is counted.”

"Really, the problem here is that we spend too much on special education. That's the real harm! We need to cut these disabled kids off for their own good!"

None of this is exceptionally noteworthy in and of itself. It's the same pattern we're all used to seeing from the GOP by now: don't do the thing; when Dems do the thing, accuse them of breaking rules and laws in a quest for power; bring some billionaire or lackey out to explain how the thing should never be done in the first place, in fact we already do too much of the thing and should cut back.

Rinse and repeat over decades and you have the current state of US politics.

The noteworthy part is how relatively minor this particular fight is. And I think that's what's contributing to how extra awful the Republicans come across now.

They used to save this kind of shit for the big leagues. Now they are weaponizing it against 91,000 schoolchildren in Kansas.

[theyoungturks]

Jamaal Bowman railed against Republicans stance on gun violence in the halls of Congress. Ana Kasparian and Cenk Uygur discuss on The Young Turks. Watch TYT LIVE on weekdays 6-8 pm ET. http://youtube.com/theyoungturks/live Read more HERE: https://www.commondreams.org/news/bowman-massie-gun-violence "Democratic Rep. Jamaal Bowman vocally condemned his Republican colleagues in a hallway outside the House chamber on Wednesday, calling them "freaking cowards" and "gutless" for refusing to support basic control measures in the wake of the nation's latest mass shooting—the 130th of the year. As Bowman railed against GOP obstructionism, saying that Republicans "won't do anything to save the lives of our children," Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) stopped to ask the New York Democrat, "What are you talking about?" "I'm talking about gun violence!" Bowman responded. Massie—who in 2021 posted a Christmas photo in which he and his family members are holding guns—proceeded to tout a dangerous, NRA-backed proposal that Republicans float after virtually every school shooting in the U.S.: Arming teachers. (A number of states already allow teachers to carry firearms under certain conditions.)" *** The largest online progressive news show in the world. Hosted by Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian. LIVE weekdays 6-8 pm ET. Help support our mission and get perks. Membership protects TYT's independence from corporate ownership and allows us to provide free live shows that speak truth to power for people around the world. See Perks: ▶ https://www.youtube.com/TheYoungTurks/join SUBSCRIBE on YOUTUBE: ☞ http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=theyoungturks FACEBOOK: ☞ http://www.facebook.com/TheYoungTurks TWITTER: ☞ http://www.twitter.com/TheYoungTurks INSTAGRAM: ☞ http://www.instagram.com/TheYoungTurks TWITCH: ☞ http://www.twitch.com/tyt 👕 Merch: http://shoptyt.com ❤ Donate: http://www.tyt.com/go 🔗 Website: https://www.tyt.com 📱App: http://www.tyt.com/app 📬 Newsletters: https://www.tyt.com/newsletters/ If you want to watch more videos from TYT, consider subscribing to other channels in our network: The Watchlist https://www.youtube.com/watchlisttyt Indisputable with Dr. Rashad Richey https://www.youtube.com/indisputabletyt Unbossed with Nina Turner https://www.youtube.com/unbossedtyt The Damage Report ▶ https://www.youtube.com/thedamagereport TYT Sports ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytsports The Conversation ▶ https://www.youtube.com/tytconversation Rebel HQ ▶ https://www.youtube.com/rebelhq TYT Investigates ▶ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwNJt9PYyN1uyw2XhNIQMMA #TYT #TheYoungTurks #BreakingNews 230330__TB02ProgressivesBlastsRepublicans by The Young Turks

[postapocalypticcottagecore]

And after that, the question becomes how to prevent the GOP sending it straight down the toilet in the first hundred days after they finally claw their way back into power, probably by grinding everyone down with obstructionism, voter suppression and every other underhanded tactic they can think of.

hot off the presses

He's proposing:

No Immunity for Crimes a Former President Committed in Office

Term Limits for Supreme Court Justices

Binding Code of Conduct for the Supreme Court (enforceable conduct and ethics rules that require Justices to disclose gifts, refrain from public political activity, and recuse themselves from cases in which they or their spouses have financial or other conflicts of interest.)

The question now is, whether it'll get passed (and if it doesn't, then you can bet if Harris wins and has a Democratic Congress, she'll try again and get it passed).

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Stephen Groves and Mary Clare Jalonick at AP:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Wartime aid for Ukraine was left hanging in the Senate Wednesday after Republicans blocked a bipartisan border package that had been tied to the funding, then struggled to coalesce around a plan to salvage the aid for Kyiv.

After GOP senators scuttled months of negotiations with Democrats on legislation intended to cut back record numbers of illegal border crossings, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer tried to push ahead to a crucial test vote on a $95 billion package for Ukraine, Israel and other U.S. allies — a modified package with the border portion stripped out. But a deeply divided Republican conference was scrambling to find support for the wartime funding, even though it has been a top priority for Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. It was the latest sign of the longtime Republican leader’s slipping control over his conference and underscored how the traditional GOP tenet of robust foreign involvement is giving way to Donald Trump’s “America First” nationalism. At stake is the future of Ukraine’s defense against Russia. The Senate floor settled into an hours-long stall Wednesday night as Republicans huddled to see if they could gain the votes necessary to push it through the chamber. Schumer then closed the floor, saying he would “give our Republican colleagues the night to figure themselves out” ahead of a crucial test vote Thursday. [...]

A pairing of border policies and aid for allies — first proposed by Republicans — was intended to help squeeze the package through the House, where archconservatives hold control. But GOP senators — some within minutes of the bill’s release Sunday — rejected the compromise as election-year politics set in. Many Republicans said the compromise wasn’t enough and they would rather allow the issue be decided in the presidential election. Supporters of the bill insisted it represented the most comprehensive bipartisan border proposal in years and included many Republican priorities. The vote failed 49-50 — far short of the 60 ayes needed to take up the bill — with four Republicans voting to move forward with the legislation and six Democrats, some of whom said the border compromise went too far, voting against it. The bipartisan group of senators who negotiated the compromise for the last four months said it was a missed opportunity to try to make some progress on one of the most intractable issues in American politics.

Senate Republicans sabotaged the bipartisan border security reforms bill that had lots of concessions to immigration restrictionists in a 49-50 cloture vote, far short of the 60 required (4 GOPers crossed over to grant cloture and 6 Dems voted NAY on grounds that the bill too heavy-handed in immigration enforcement).

Republicans have been clamoring for a fix to solve the border crisis, but in the end, they solved bupkis… all because of Donald Trump and the right-wing media encouraging opposition to the bipartisan bill.

[faultfalha]

The first Republican debate was a surreal experience. Denial of climate change was rampant, with candidates insisting that the science is still out. It was like stepping into a time machine, transported back to the 1920s when people first started denying the reality of evolution. But I guess I shouldn't have been surprised. This is the party that denies the reality of evolution, after all.

[ramrodd]

The Truth Doesn't Please Everybody, and That's Okay: With Larry Wilmore

COMMENTARY:

The thing brother Michael Steele needs to confront, along with all the RINO's determined  to restoring the Party of Lincoln  coalition as the dominant element of the GOP is that from 1981 until Trump's  election, the COP was a Reagan cult of personality: Trump just jacked it from underneath you in the same way the John Birch Society hijacked Barry Goldwater's Conservative brand as campaign activists . You are complicit in the craton of the conditions sustaining Trump at the moment. Nicole Wallace is the most aware of her complicity and working constructive to fix it,

Nikki Haley is drawing Ross Perot's vote, This is the legacy of the Greatest Generation who want to make things work, This is the Jack Kemp Silen Majoiryt, Get behind Nici Haly and take it to the Convention, Unhook the Nazification of the January t conspiracy and  leave it behind.

As for Democrats, they need to abandon the 60s liberal Political Correctness on-campus cancel culture of the Post Modern Historic Deconstruction: it has made you useful idiots of what has been revealed as the Janaury y agenda Pete Buttigieg is leading the way out of the Boomer morass of unending dialectical food fights like something utt of Animal House

we are a cunt hair away from the Green New Deal and the combination of the US Space Force and Biden's Build Back Better capital budget is already begging to cut that cunt hair into ribbons, the obstructionism of Moscow Mitch and the January 6 majority of Trump bots. The coalition that voted George Santo out is perfectly capable of vaating the chair and restoring the Pelosi rules to complet tStage  6 of  Eisenhower's 1956 Presidential Platform to create the Star Wars economics of Starship America.  

Pete ButtigiegDemocrats and Jack Kemp Republicans are the future of the American experiment,  It's what Eisenhower had in mind,

[usnewsper-politics]

House Committee Deletes Evidence: Republicans Cry Foul, Demand Transparency #Americanpeople #balance #democrats #documents #encryptedfiles #evidence #HouseCommitteeonJanuary6 #HouseGOPsources #Houserules #integrity #investigation #January6attackontheCapitol #obstructionism #politicalclimate #Republicans #riot #secrecy #sensitiveinformation #sensitiveinformation. #stonewalling #transparency #Trumpadministrationofficials #Witnesses

[taiwantalk]

This is a gop partisan bullshit. No one enjoys this more than republicans.

Gop is in the habit of either stalling democratic appointments or deliberately appoints seriously unqualified candidates when they are the majority.

Gop is really terrible, and all they’re doing is teaching the world about obstructionism.

Obstructionism or being disagreeable on anything is the same as destroying a country from within.

Democracy everywhere really need to figure a way out to inhibit obstructionism and long term erosion or dismantlement of constitution.

At the is rate, gop is paving a pathway to end the constitution, to start secession, to stage grounds for civil war.

[thewordygreenlion]

McCarthy’s Mess, or Obstructionism Comes Home

McCarthy’s Mess, or Obstructionism Comes Home. Couple things: (1) obstructionism strikes within it’s own home! (2) this could be a deliberate monkey-wrench maneuver.

Sooo remember when the GOP strategy was to impede any and all democratic functioning to the point that the US Federal Government shut down? …

[alex51324]

This whole thing is actually kind of good, though, because for decades the superpower of the Republican Party has been that they will unite behind anybody who mouths the right words about Jesus and fetuses--they normally reserve this kind of dumb-insolence obstructionism for when they’re pissing out of the tent.  None of this bodes well for their ability to win an election two years from now, and it suggests a Republican primary with a strong resemblance to a circular firing squad.  

(The one way it could go wrong for, y’know, those of us who like a functioning society is if the GOP fractures into two-or-more parties, and it’s the hard-right one that wins the breakup.  Which could happen, but it’s not the most likely scenario.)  

Kevin McCarthy losing four five six consecutive Speaker of the House votes (so far) is legitimately one of the funniest things to ever happen. This is 2023's boat stuck in the Suez Canal. Something important has ceased working for the most hilarious possible reason and we are all watching desperate attempts to get it working again while secretly hoping it does not, and I think that's beautiful