Pelosi is Losing Her Grip ...

Poor Nancy has not only lost her grip on reality ... she's lost her grip on the US House of Representatives too. MSM not paying a lot of attention to this ... but (D)'s have jumped ship on 'ol Nancy. Celebration of bipartisan cooperation to include common sense provisions in otherwise unpalatable legislation might be premature though. Nancy ain't going out quietly to pasture, and she ain't going to let common sense dictate DNC policy either.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...s-house-rules-change-to-thwart-gop-amendments
Madam Fascist would of course normally be praised for silencing the minority opposition ... But Nancy's crackdown also extends to dissenters in her own party who crossed the aisle in order to legislate honorably, and for the benefit of their constituents. Will Nancy's dictatorship materialize, and is that what progressives want, at the risk of being silenced by Nancy themselves? MSM perhaps affraid of stoking divisions here?

 

An old rich white hag with alzheimer's controls the peasants clamoring "the millionaires and billionaires must pay". That's exactly how socialism works!

 

She ain't doin nothin Mitch the Bitch ain't dun!!

 

She's rattling her sabre, and very effectively too!

Pelosi has no intention of actually making this rules change. But she is giving notice that she expects that there will always be enough Democrats on the floor at any given time to defeat all Motions to Recommit.

Which accomplishes the same objective.

And I expect that Democrats will comply.

 

Pelosi is done.



Actual comic.

 

So the (D)'s that supported the GOP MTR ... Pelosi putting them on notice? Are you curious to know which (D)'s Nancy's trying to intimidate. Curious as to why MSM hasn't asked for their reactions? Fascism looks to be an easier sell than I expected ...

 

Facism? Like the Hastert Rule?

 

1st ... no one really pays any attention to the Hasert rule at all ... not even Hasert himself. 2nd ... the rule makes sense in that congressional time isn't wasted by debating bills with no hope of passage. Rep. Al Green has taken to the House floor to call for a vote on impeachment, on 3 seperate occasions. Hasert didn't deter him. A more interesting contrast IMO, is Comrade Ocasio informing (D) defectors that their "names had been moved to a list" ... a list of names who would be targeted, and beset by radical activists if they crossed the aisle again. Almost a 40's HUAC Holltwood blacklist maneuver with the commies role reversed. 26 (D) reps supported the GOP's MTR, only identified as vulnerable reps from Trump districts. With that many dissenters, can Pelosi even claim to lead a House majority? How far will Nancy and AOC go to subvert the purest form of representative government? Blacklists? Deplorable really.

 

First, your initial claim is absolutely false.

During the entire time that the GOP had the House, the Hastert rule held firm, with almost no exceptions.

Then you go on an defend a rule that you falsely claim nobody paid attention to, thus directly contradicting yourself (not for the first time, either).

I have no idea what your rant about Al Green had to do with the Hastert Rule, as there is no relationship at all.

Do you actually even know what the Hastert Rule was (and it is a was, since the GOP lost the House)????

It does not appear as though you do.

 

Quite familiar thank you ... so is MSNBC. Hasert violated his own rule a dozen times. http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/the-absurdity-the-hastert-rule Naturally I disagree with MSNBC's "absurdity" argument, as Hasert prevents endless debate on DOA legislation. The article does illustrate SOME of the DOZENS of times the rule has been ignored. I asked very basic questions about the CURRENT TOPIC ...

 

You posted a dead link.

The Hastert Rule says that the Republican speaker won't allow any legislation on the floor that can't be passed with Republican votes alone.

The de-facto Hastert Rule dates all the way back to Gingrich, who enforced the "majority of the majority" rule, before it was named after Hastert.

The Hastert Rule has been the practice of the GOP House since 1995. So, if Hastert "violated it a dozen times" (I saw that too), then that's an average of less than once a year.

And, it's clear from your posts taht you either don't understand what the Hastert Rule was, or you're playing silly games again. The Hastert Rule has nothing to do with debate,

 

Link fixed ... and you got Gingrich whataboutisms that serve what purpose? CURRENT TOPIC?

 

Very TRUMPIAN, huh?

 

Sorry, but your weak deflection doesn't cut it. This is not Current Events.

And Gingrich did practice the "majority of the majority" rule as a practice. You couldn't refute any part of my post, so you tried to play games with it.....again.

And, I see I was finally able to educate you on what the Hastert rule actually is.

 

No, Trump isn't that smart and doesn't posess that level of political skill.

 

I thought the Hastert rule was about diddling with little boys?

Think they will have a Roy Moore rule soon?

Hey evangelicals, you sure know how to pick em, hea?

 

Pardon ... but I am the author. I chose the topic. Hastert & Gingrich are not relevant to Pelosi's waning influence, or comrade Ocasio's blacklist. Now you are free to create a thread of your own on Hastert & Gingrich et al. if you like. This one however centers on the fragility of the current House majority, and Pelosi / AOC attempting to intimidate reps to toe the party line ... or else.

 

When was McConnell Speaker of the House? At least post your problems with the way Ryan and Boehner treated Democrats. That you have to lower the discourse to name calling says more about you than it does about the people you think you are denigrating.

 

Pelosi's influence is not waning. Indeed, she made a fool out of Donald Trump (with plenty of help from Trump himself).

All she has to do is hint that she may do something like this rule change (which is far less exculsionary than the Hastert rule was, thus making a mockery of your facism meme).

You aren't the moderator, so you don't get to dictate who says what here.

And your stance is especially hypocritical since you play the deflection game every day on multiple threads.

Now, if you have a substatative point to make..........

 

Maybe Pelodi can recover but, for now, it's the AOC Party.

Meet the new boss.

https://news.yahoo.com/aoc-threatens-put-moderate-dems-133644548.html

 

26 of Pelosi's (D) colleagues voted with the opposition. Pelosi's reaction was to float a rules change, whilst her new commie CO-SPEAKER threatened to have dissenters set upon by radical activists. Cortez hasn't broadcast her blacklist, so presumably Cortez will have to personally inform ANTIFA et al. which offices to vandalize, and who to assault. Fascism. Do you really think accusing me of deflecting, masks your derailing?

 

You mean like chastising moderates that vote their constituency's wishes?

 

Of course the radicals are really upset by the amendment to the bill that will not become law by including having to report illegals that do not pass a background check for a gun purchase. The OP talks about common sense. This appears to be a common sense amendment.

 

And exactly what has ICE abolitionist Cortez frothing at the mouth. The big takeaway IMO is that Pelosi's majority isn't really a majority after all. 26 seats held by vulnerable reps from districts who support Trump? The 2 reps brave enough to push back, said they made a pledge to put their people before politics, and to go back on it is political suicide. Pelosi's reaction was to tease at more DNC campaign finance money being invested in vulnerable districts. (D)'s still think they can buy elections?

 

BS.

That's the kind of thinking you get from the people who have only a superficial understanding of government,

Just because a freshman Congresswoman is a temporary media darling, does not mean that she is suddenly the head of a political party.

I realize that it is very important for right wing media to misrepresent events taht way. After all, appearances on television are reality to the Trumpster crowd, which generally isn't very well informed.

A month ago, the right wing line was that all the Democrats had was opposition to Trump and that Democrats don't stand for anything.

Ocasio Cortez, as the current de facto messenger to mellenials (the largest single voting block in the US) has provided the a clear agenda for the party. That does not make her a party leade (unless she can sustain her current media presence and translate that into legislative accomplishment). But it does make her a powerful spokesperson, one who resonates clearly with a voting block the GOP has no chance of appealing to.

Pelosi is smart enough to know that the 29 year old Ocasio Cortez knows how to communicate to her cohort in a way that the 78 year old speaker can't. I have little doubt that they are coordinating messanging. She is also smart enough to know that if Ocasio Cortez turns out to be a flash in the pan, she can be pitched over the side with little impact on the party.

Just as I have no doubt that Pelosi is planning on spending the next few years grooming a successor.

It is a very interesting contrast, that there was little real debate or struggle over whether Nancy Pelosi wanted to be Speaker, or that she would have any trouble getting it (other than some dishonest right wing noise to that effect).

Quite a contrast to the GOP, where John Boehner said screw this and went home, and Paul Ryan tried desperately to avoid having to take the job.