Datasets:

---

innovation-hacking2

/

shitposting_dataset3

like 0

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\"." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”.." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it", ">\n\nWell, just seeing m.t. cheezing it up with mccarthy for photo ops this week is not a good sign." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it", ">\n\nWell, just seeing m.t. cheezing it up with mccarthy for photo ops this week is not a good sign.", ">\n\nBut Nancy, you could have done the same, you didn't have to vote for McCarthy everytime, just make demands after other demands were honored." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it", ">\n\nWell, just seeing m.t. cheezing it up with mccarthy for photo ops this week is not a good sign.", ">\n\nBut Nancy, you could have done the same, you didn't have to vote for McCarthy everytime, just make demands after other demands were honored.", ">\n\nImagine not trusting McCarthy but still voting for him 15 times." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it", ">\n\nWell, just seeing m.t. cheezing it up with mccarthy for photo ops this week is not a good sign.", ">\n\nBut Nancy, you could have done the same, you didn't have to vote for McCarthy everytime, just make demands after other demands were honored.", ">\n\nImagine not trusting McCarthy but still voting for him 15 times.", ">\n\nThe treason republican party is selling out their own self now" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it", ">\n\nWell, just seeing m.t. cheezing it up with mccarthy for photo ops this week is not a good sign.", ">\n\nBut Nancy, you could have done the same, you didn't have to vote for McCarthy everytime, just make demands after other demands were honored.", ">\n\nImagine not trusting McCarthy but still voting for him 15 times.", ">\n\nThe treason republican party is selling out their own self now", ">\n\nDoes it really matter? After the GOP won the house, that really put the nail in the coffin for me. I’m done with media. It’s all fucking clickbait to divide Americans even more. If you have any brain cells, you would know that anything the House passes will ultimately be shot down by the Democratic majority in senate. It’s common sense morons. Stop getting so butt-hurt over this clickbait articles and trying to trash republicans and cause divide. I really wish there wasn’t a “party” system. Why can’t we just vote on a HUMAN for their beliefs. Fuck this whole party bullshit." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it", ">\n\nWell, just seeing m.t. cheezing it up with mccarthy for photo ops this week is not a good sign.", ">\n\nBut Nancy, you could have done the same, you didn't have to vote for McCarthy everytime, just make demands after other demands were honored.", ">\n\nImagine not trusting McCarthy but still voting for him 15 times.", ">\n\nThe treason republican party is selling out their own self now", ">\n\nDoes it really matter? After the GOP won the house, that really put the nail in the coffin for me. I’m done with media. It’s all fucking clickbait to divide Americans even more. If you have any brain cells, you would know that anything the House passes will ultimately be shot down by the Democratic majority in senate. It’s common sense morons. Stop getting so butt-hurt over this clickbait articles and trying to trash republicans and cause divide. I really wish there wasn’t a “party” system. Why can’t we just vote on a HUMAN for their beliefs. Fuck this whole party bullshit.", ">\n\n\nAfter the GOP won the senate\nthe Democratic majority in senate. \n\nPick one." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it", ">\n\nWell, just seeing m.t. cheezing it up with mccarthy for photo ops this week is not a good sign.", ">\n\nBut Nancy, you could have done the same, you didn't have to vote for McCarthy everytime, just make demands after other demands were honored.", ">\n\nImagine not trusting McCarthy but still voting for him 15 times.", ">\n\nThe treason republican party is selling out their own self now", ">\n\nDoes it really matter? After the GOP won the house, that really put the nail in the coffin for me. I’m done with media. It’s all fucking clickbait to divide Americans even more. If you have any brain cells, you would know that anything the House passes will ultimately be shot down by the Democratic majority in senate. It’s common sense morons. Stop getting so butt-hurt over this clickbait articles and trying to trash republicans and cause divide. I really wish there wasn’t a “party” system. Why can’t we just vote on a HUMAN for their beliefs. Fuck this whole party bullshit.", ">\n\n\nAfter the GOP won the senate\nthe Democratic majority in senate. \n\nPick one.", ">\n\nWhy didn't dems make a deal with Mccarthy to neuter the crazies from the MAGA wing?\nLike it or not, Gaetz won. The Dems should have gotten creative and gotten some concessions themselves." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it", ">\n\nWell, just seeing m.t. cheezing it up with mccarthy for photo ops this week is not a good sign.", ">\n\nBut Nancy, you could have done the same, you didn't have to vote for McCarthy everytime, just make demands after other demands were honored.", ">\n\nImagine not trusting McCarthy but still voting for him 15 times.", ">\n\nThe treason republican party is selling out their own self now", ">\n\nDoes it really matter? After the GOP won the house, that really put the nail in the coffin for me. I’m done with media. It’s all fucking clickbait to divide Americans even more. If you have any brain cells, you would know that anything the House passes will ultimately be shot down by the Democratic majority in senate. It’s common sense morons. Stop getting so butt-hurt over this clickbait articles and trying to trash republicans and cause divide. I really wish there wasn’t a “party” system. Why can’t we just vote on a HUMAN for their beliefs. Fuck this whole party bullshit.", ">\n\n\nAfter the GOP won the senate\nthe Democratic majority in senate. \n\nPick one.", ">\n\nWhy didn't dems make a deal with Mccarthy to neuter the crazies from the MAGA wing?\nLike it or not, Gaetz won. The Dems should have gotten creative and gotten some concessions themselves.", ">\n\nRepublicans are fundamentally dishonest. Whatever concessions Democrats might have gotten would not be honored. Better for the Republicans' dishonesty gnaw upon itself." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it", ">\n\nWell, just seeing m.t. cheezing it up with mccarthy for photo ops this week is not a good sign.", ">\n\nBut Nancy, you could have done the same, you didn't have to vote for McCarthy everytime, just make demands after other demands were honored.", ">\n\nImagine not trusting McCarthy but still voting for him 15 times.", ">\n\nThe treason republican party is selling out their own self now", ">\n\nDoes it really matter? After the GOP won the house, that really put the nail in the coffin for me. I’m done with media. It’s all fucking clickbait to divide Americans even more. If you have any brain cells, you would know that anything the House passes will ultimately be shot down by the Democratic majority in senate. It’s common sense morons. Stop getting so butt-hurt over this clickbait articles and trying to trash republicans and cause divide. I really wish there wasn’t a “party” system. Why can’t we just vote on a HUMAN for their beliefs. Fuck this whole party bullshit.", ">\n\n\nAfter the GOP won the senate\nthe Democratic majority in senate. \n\nPick one.", ">\n\nWhy didn't dems make a deal with Mccarthy to neuter the crazies from the MAGA wing?\nLike it or not, Gaetz won. The Dems should have gotten creative and gotten some concessions themselves.", ">\n\nRepublicans are fundamentally dishonest. Whatever concessions Democrats might have gotten would not be honored. Better for the Republicans' dishonesty gnaw upon itself.", ">\n\nI don't get that logic. You'd rather they crater to the MAGA wing and give them consessions?" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it", ">\n\nWell, just seeing m.t. cheezing it up with mccarthy for photo ops this week is not a good sign.", ">\n\nBut Nancy, you could have done the same, you didn't have to vote for McCarthy everytime, just make demands after other demands were honored.", ">\n\nImagine not trusting McCarthy but still voting for him 15 times.", ">\n\nThe treason republican party is selling out their own self now", ">\n\nDoes it really matter? After the GOP won the house, that really put the nail in the coffin for me. I’m done with media. It’s all fucking clickbait to divide Americans even more. If you have any brain cells, you would know that anything the House passes will ultimately be shot down by the Democratic majority in senate. It’s common sense morons. Stop getting so butt-hurt over this clickbait articles and trying to trash republicans and cause divide. I really wish there wasn’t a “party” system. Why can’t we just vote on a HUMAN for their beliefs. Fuck this whole party bullshit.", ">\n\n\nAfter the GOP won the senate\nthe Democratic majority in senate. \n\nPick one.", ">\n\nWhy didn't dems make a deal with Mccarthy to neuter the crazies from the MAGA wing?\nLike it or not, Gaetz won. The Dems should have gotten creative and gotten some concessions themselves.", ">\n\nRepublicans are fundamentally dishonest. Whatever concessions Democrats might have gotten would not be honored. Better for the Republicans' dishonesty gnaw upon itself.", ">\n\nI don't get that logic. You'd rather they crater to the MAGA wing and give them consessions?", ">\n\nThe logic is you don't vote for fascists who voted to keep Trump in office twice." ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it", ">\n\nWell, just seeing m.t. cheezing it up with mccarthy for photo ops this week is not a good sign.", ">\n\nBut Nancy, you could have done the same, you didn't have to vote for McCarthy everytime, just make demands after other demands were honored.", ">\n\nImagine not trusting McCarthy but still voting for him 15 times.", ">\n\nThe treason republican party is selling out their own self now", ">\n\nDoes it really matter? After the GOP won the house, that really put the nail in the coffin for me. I’m done with media. It’s all fucking clickbait to divide Americans even more. If you have any brain cells, you would know that anything the House passes will ultimately be shot down by the Democratic majority in senate. It’s common sense morons. Stop getting so butt-hurt over this clickbait articles and trying to trash republicans and cause divide. I really wish there wasn’t a “party” system. Why can’t we just vote on a HUMAN for their beliefs. Fuck this whole party bullshit.", ">\n\n\nAfter the GOP won the senate\nthe Democratic majority in senate. \n\nPick one.", ">\n\nWhy didn't dems make a deal with Mccarthy to neuter the crazies from the MAGA wing?\nLike it or not, Gaetz won. The Dems should have gotten creative and gotten some concessions themselves.", ">\n\nRepublicans are fundamentally dishonest. Whatever concessions Democrats might have gotten would not be honored. Better for the Republicans' dishonesty gnaw upon itself.", ">\n\nI don't get that logic. You'd rather they crater to the MAGA wing and give them consessions?", ">\n\nThe logic is you don't vote for fascists who voted to keep Trump in office twice.", ">\n\nPolitics is tricky.\nDid the maga wing gain more power or not? Did the dems have a window to contain it by getting creative?\nEdit: I understand that the maga problem is at the foot of the Republicans and I am not sure that there was a play here for the Democrats. Just thinking outside of the box. Am I crazy to wish that our elected officials got creative to wrestle power away from those crazy fucks? It seemed for a minute the Republicans were equally frustrated. Chaos is a ladder!" ]

[ "Seriously? McCarthy is full MAGA. They just handed him everything, including the idiot \"sounding the alarm\".", ">\n\nYeah, it’s fucking pathetic. They could have chosen literally anyone else if they were this concerned. They had 15 votes to do it ffs", ">\n\nYup. And could have just voted present if they really didn’t want him.", ">\n\nVoting ‘present’ merely lowers the threshold for votes need to secure the Speaker role.", ">\n\nWhich, prior to the last few rounds, would have brought Jeffries closer.", ">\n\n1) Not to request the National Guard during the next insurrection.\n2) To punish C=Span for their camera work last week\n3) To cut the ethics group", ">\n\nWhy would they cut the ethics committee when they can instead corrupt the fuck out of it and make it do the exact opposite of its intent?", ">\n\nYou mean as it currently stands lol. Both house and senate ethics committees are known to be places complaints go to die. When you let the foxes run their own henhouse don't expect anything less. We need checks on corruption self-correcting is never going to happen. These people need oversight outside the other 2 branches.\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today and how it aides corruption making it all but impossible to root out. With \"news channels\" pumping propaganda that should have been outlawed after ww2 they (people in power) know exactly what they are doing and how to keep their brand of government reigning supreme.", ">\n\n\nThe founders didn't forsee how technology would be today\n\nThe founders never intended the Constitution to be an inflexible, unmodifiable document.\nOnly an idiot would suggest a framework that doesn't ever evolve.", ">\n\nI mean, they literally amended it before they ratified it. The principle that the constitution can and should be changed was literally a precedent before the constitution was law.", ">\n\nWhat I always wonder is, do Constitutional Originalists want to do away with the amendments? So no freedom of speech or right to bear arms? After all, neither are in the original Constitution.", ">\n\nNo, you're misinterpreting what \"originalism\" means in this context. It's about \"what did this originally mean when it was written\". \nIn principle I agree with it 100% - what did the people who wrote X word mean when they wrote it should be what matters. \nIn practice I don't agree with it, because (as was noted earlier in the thread) the document wasn't intended to be locked in. The best practice would be \"we think it should cover Y, but the author did not consider it to covery Y, so we should change it to cover Y\" - but, it's too rigidly difficult to change it for that to work so we *have* to allow updatd understandings of terms and words or the whole thing falls apart due to not being flexible.", ">\n\nIt's literally built into the constitution.\n\nArticle V:\nThe Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.", ">\n\nRight. The problem is that the way in which it is built in is far too difficult to actually achieve.", ">\n\nI suspect that aspect of it was at least somewhat intentional. I can't find any concrete evidence for it at the moment, but I'm quite sure one of the intentions of Article V was that it would be used approximately every 20 years or so. Obviously we haven't been doing that. The fact that we haven't seems to fly in the face of \"originalism\". That aside, could you imagine if the states held a constitutional convention in the present political climate? It would be a circus of epic proportions.", ">\n\nIf the backroom deals really bothered them then they should have voted for Jeffries.", ">\n\nIt's all Kabuki Theater...smoke and mirrors.", ">\n\nKayfabe. Trump was a Heal, Obamma was a face, we're the marks.", ">\n\nSo close until you did the \"both sides\". Good faith governance is not pro wrestling.", ">\n\nWhat is good faith governance ? All I see is a transfer of wealth upwards. Marks, all of us.", ">\n\nOne side wants to take your wealth \nThe other side wants to take your wealth while dragging gays and trans people from their pickups \nAre either of them good? No. \nAre they the same? No.", ">\n\nIt's fittingly darkly appropriate that the group of people who are steadfastly demanding 72 hours to review a bill before it could be voted on, want to spring the new rules on the themselves moment before having to vote on it.", ">\n\nWell, they wouldn't want there to be time for the implications of various rules revisions to sink in, before they were adopted, now would they?", ">\n\nAnd just think, if she doesn’t like anything at all, she can demand a new speaker vote and they have to do it all over again!!! And any of them can any time they feel like it. McCarthy is s national joke.", ">\n\nCan any house member call for a new vote, or just someone from his party?", ">\n\nI've heard both Republicans only and anyone from different sources, but reading the proposed rules package it only mentions members, no mention of affiliation.", ">\n\nThat would be unconstitutional to only allow one party to do something by way of congressional rules", ">\n\nThe constitution says that the Congress can do pretty much whatever the fuck they want.", ">\n\nThere is a difference between the political question doctrine and barring a legal remedy based solely on viewpoint/political affiliation", ">\n\nAnd house rules aren't a legal remedy. The house can make whatever rules it wants to govern itself.", ">\n\nThat would allow rules to say something lie “only Arkansas can propose laws.” There’s no way it is that broad.", ">\n\nIf the representatives from Arkansas could get the majority of the house to agree in an up or down vote that should be the rule, then that's the rule. What oversight mechanism do you think exists to override the House's authority over itself?\nAnd for the record, I'm not in favor of any of this, but on a strictly constitutional level, the rules are set solely by the full body. The remedy envisioned was a political one. Surely if the Arkansas reps tried to impose such a rule, it would fail and they would be diminished in future legislation as non-serious actors.", ">\n\nYou could have refused to vote for him until details were made public. But that would take a spine.", ">\n\nIt doesn't matter what deals were cut. Republicans have no policy agenda. Only an agenda for fund raising and media attention. No bills we come out of the House and make it into law.", ">\n\nWhat policy agenda could they have? They cant pass any legislation. Anything Democrats push is not going to align with Republican interests, the only thing Republicans can do is obstruct the Democratic party and use their time to investigate Democrats.\nThis article is ridiculous, no one in the House gives a shit about any negotiations for committee assignments other than the individuals who feel they were cut out.", ">\n\nI bet Democrats would go for a border security bill, transportation and infrastructure, energy bills especially with the Russian invasion, more Chips revolving bills, something even almost touching on gun reform, and some restrictions for congressmen.\nThere’s a lot they can do, but I doubt we’ll see anything but pointless investigations and bills they no will go nowhere.", ">\n\nNo they can't. The Republicans have voted against these things time and time again. They also don't want to give Biden the \"win.\" They would never allow Congress to be productive under a Democrat. Do you know how I know this? Because they've been telling us exactly this for over a decade now.", ">\n\nSince Reagan.", ">\n\nRemember when conservatives would’ve thought colluding with Russia was a bad thing back during the Regan era?", ">\n\nI member.", ">\n\nOk you can sound the alarm, but you could have just not voted for him too. I mean you could have gotten 6 others who were “alarmed” to vote for Jeffries and you wouldn’t have had to worry about what back room MAGA deals were made. This just screams I don’t want to go down with this ship so I’m gonna voice my “alarm” now in case my vote comes back to bite me in the ass.", ">\n\nCYA at its best!", ">\n\ngee, maybe you could have said something about it when they were cutting deals.", ">\n\nNothing to help the average American.", ">\n\nThat’s not the purpose of Republicans. It’s to hurt everyone except the wealthy.", ">\n\nNot the purpose of the democrats either, just one big shit show, designed to make people think their votes matter.", ">\n\nHow about student debt relief? I know SCOTUS torpedoed it, but how is that not the dems attempting to do something to help people?", ">\n\nBecause they new it would never pass the court system. Both political parties in the US are not for the middle or lower income people, but they do stuff to appear like they do.", ">\n\nOk bro, sure.", ">\n\nYou voted for him, you know exactly what you were doing. Crying wolf after you let it into the herd is bull shit.", ">\n\nCould have withheld their vote and got their own backroom deal. I'm not sure why everyone wasn't doing this.", ">\n\n\"Well let's not all do the 'withholding their vote to get a backroom deal' thing.\"", ">\n\nThey don't know what they gave up, yet they voted for it along with McCarthy and the assistant Speaker Matt Gaetz.\nThey're all part of the same conspiracy now. They're all complicit, even those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.", ">\n\n\neven those like Nancy Mace who complain about it.\n\nThis isn't coming from a sense of morality or House decorum, she's just envious of those that got something out of it when she just rode the (R) train like a dope.", ">\n\nKevin McCarthy is the Speaker in title only, all of the power of the Speaker is held in the hands of the members of the Chaos Caucus.", ">\n\n\nmembers of the Chaos Caucus.\n\nFascist Caucus. Call it what it is.", ">\n\nSedition Caucus", ">\n\nSure but euphemisms aren’t helping people understand the gravity of what’s happening. And if it can happen in the US, it can happen in any other democracy, no matter how healthy it is.", ">\n\nMcCarthy is such a slimy, shameless piece of shit. Anyone with any self-respect would have given a fat middle finger to Matt Gaetz and Lauren Boebert and cut a deal with moderate Democrats to ensure not a single one of those losers ever sits on a committee or receives any fundraising whatsoever. They publicly eviscerated him on a personal level far above and beyond what any Democrat has done.", ">\n\nBut no one was in the room when it happened, the room when it happened", ">\n\nI read on the /r/worldnews Ukraine war megathread that McCarthy pledged to cut aid to Ukraine in order to gain votes. The Republican party works for Russia. McCarthy will do whatever Putin wants, or Putin's servants in Congress will end McCarthy's speakership.", ">\n\nI feel like he can't do that with the narrow Republican margin. There are still Republicans who support aid to Ukraine, luckily.", ">\n\nI'm not sure if they'll be able to get bills to support Ukraine out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. The fascists demanded many important committee seats which would give them a lot of power to decide what gets voted on.", ">\n\nThey may be able to move to bring the bill out of committee, so that the MAGA types' opinions on those bills don't even matter.\nOr, they could use one of the new rules to fire McCarthy and convince 7 Republicans to vote for Rep. Jeffries.", ">\n\nThe MAGAs could threaten to remove McCarthy as speaker if any of the bills they oppose get a vote. I have no doubt McCarthy would side with the fascists rather than let a Democrat become Speaker. He always bows down to the fascists. He's a fucking wimp.", ">\n\nMost of the moderate ones lost their primaries this time. Cheney, for example.", ">\n\nIt's crazy", ">\n\nThis is just more lip smacking from the so called \"moderates\" of the GOP. They'll express concern and outrage all day while doing the opposite ie a Susan Collins move.", ">\n\nKevin gave lavish gifts to the bomb throwers, snubbed his nose at the loyal Republicans. Wonder how that will work out.", ">\n\nHowever, Mace will still vote in support of the treasonous policies and rules that will be spawned by the MAGA hoard.", ">\n\nWouldn't the best time to worry about what shady deals McCarthy had to make to get elected as Speaker have been before you voted to elect him as Speaker?", ">\n\nMccarthy era?", ">\n\nWhy was this not a concern when they voted for him?", ">\n\nA house republican who fought tooth and nail to get him in a Speaker? I mean... your time to raise concerns was last week, dude... WTH?", ">\n\nI keep thinking about Hamilton:\n\nNo one else was in the room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nThe room where it happened \nNo one really knows how the game is played \nThe art of the trade \nHow the sausage gets made \nWe just assume that it happens \nBut no one else is in the room where it happens", ">\n\nApparently the joke in DC everyone is saying to McCarthy is “Where’s your dialysis machine?”, (suggesting that he gave away everything even including his kidneys).", ">\n\nCan we bring McCarthyism as a term back to describe the garbage the GOP keeps pushing?", ">\n\nIf theyre questioning it now, why tf did they vote for him in the first place? Its not like its a secret he was making deals to get the votes he needed or who he was making deals with", ">\n\nSound the alarm? If they’re so concerned about it then why did they keep voting for McCarthy 15 fucking times? The house GOP is so full of shit.", ">\n\nAll it would take is a handful of republicans to vote down the rules package.", ">\n\nModerates in swing districts will have to align with dems or they will lose their next term. My prediction is Santos and MTG are gong to face legal problems", ">\n\nHe literally agreed to give MTG his foreskin", ">\n\nIf they’re that worried, they should have elected a legislator as Speaker, not a clown.", ">\n\nIgnorant sorta question here, but I'm not American and I'm not sure how this will work. But what if now that he's sworn in, he just doesn't do jack shit for the idiots he promised to?", ">\n\nThat is one of the new rules that was voted in. The question is why didn't he just not include those ridiculous rules. I.e. lie to the freedom caucus to gain their votes while not really giving them any of the concessions they asked for. Remember that rules are voted on after the speaker is decided. \nI mean the dems aren't going to vote against a reasonable package of rules just to fk with McCarthy, are they? I'd imagine that neutering the freedom caucus is much more important than giving the figurative finger to McCartney, especially if he's being reasonable as far as the rules go.", ">\n\nIt’s more important for McCarthy to be seen as not working w the Democrats given his constituent base id think", ">\n\nHe's the one setting the rules, it would seem like the dems working with him, not him working with the dems, wouldn't it?", ">\n\nI thought the point was for republicans to never be seen “colluding” with the enemy?", ">\n\n\nMace called Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., one of the leading McCarthy foes, a \"fraud\" for using the stunt to fundraise \n\nUsing the Trump playbook.", ">\n\n“I wanna be in the room where it happened, the room where it happened…”", ">\n\n“Sound the alarm”. Motherfuckers didn’t have to vote for him. Could have left or voted present in any of the pre13th ballot.", ">\n\nFucking disingenuous little maggots.\nIf 6, only 6, of you spineless little parasites were willing to put country and democracy ahead of party, this would have been avoided.\nBackroom deals? You could have fucking stopped them.", ">\n\nMaybe y'all should've thought of that and chosen someone else from your 220-member strong coalition instead of, you know, voting for him FIFTEEN times in a row. \nI have zero empathy for the GOP with the shitstorm they're bringing down on their heads after this debacle of an selection process. And if not for the fact that the country as a whole would suffer, I'd wish the Democrats would just step back and let the clown show commence.", ">\n\nCrazy that 20 MAGA shitheads upended the GOP trying to cut ties. Get ready for them to try and drive this country into the dirt again.", ">\n\nNot in this article is in this interview, where it seemed she was reading from a teleprompter, spewed the GOP talking point \"Democracy is supposed to be messy\" about the shit show. The other omission is that she's pissed off because these \"private backroom deals\" are very much and for her, too much, like how Pelosi operated. \nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".", ">\n\n\nShe's also the House Representative that brought her dog to the House chambers/floor citing \"There are no Rules right now\".\n\nTo be fair in general I can only assume that allowing or requiring dogs/or other pets to be brought to work with our representatives would only be a good thing. \nAnd yes I would be happy to have my tax dollars used for the feeding and care of congressional animals. \nI do however realize that like every other good idea this would be perverted by the rethugicans and fascists would bring pit bulls and other large animals that were poorly trained (or worse well trained and given attack signals by their handlers) to go after other animals and people they didn't like. \nP.S. I love pit bulls, had a friend with the sweetest one. A well trained dog is nothing to worry about. Its the ones that have not been trained, or are being told to do bad things that are the issue. I have no desire to be bitten by a pit bull.", ">\n\nHonestly I'd bet some true scum bag stuff was agreed upon but what do we really expect from any of these people", ">\n\nI don't think there were backroom deals in the sense that most of us can imagine the stupid, evil, and detrimental things and strategies McCarthy agreed to.\nIt is not as though he was a wonderful guy who got corrupted, he was always slime so the idea that he would continue to openly subvert democrocracy or help shepherd horrible leg8slation and or votes is a suprise to nobody.", ">\n\nWhy would they vote for him without knowing what those deals with the devil’s are.", ">\n\nSaid House Republicans also had a vote in the matter and they voted for the same guy. Let's not pretend that one of the moderate ones couldn't have grown a sack and nominated themselves with a little help from moderate Dems. They could have had their own backroom deals, but chose not to.", ">\n\nIf they are really that upset, they should call a no confidence vote and remove McCarthy. I hear it only takes one person to bring it up.", ">\n\nWe should start a pool for who the first member to call for his removal will be.", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nHe’s having to be everything for everybody so much that I hope he ends up being nothing for anybody.", ">\n\nLooking at the concessions, I conclude McCarthy will be a weak speaker. The fact that it takes one member to motion his removal means he is in serious jeopardy.\nAnd the concessions such as the debt ceiling and cuts to defense will make him unpopular with the “moderate” wing of the Republican Party. Term limits? Why would the individual congresspeople vote to term limit themselves when they access to some sweet lobbyist cash? The border may be popular with the rank and file of the Republican Party but not with its donors who fund them. Such a bill will pass the House but barely, and with opposition from traditional Republicans along with Democrats. If it survives the House, the Senate won’t take it up and Biden will repeat. At this point, the Freedom Caucus will probably blame McCarthy for trying to moderate it and here is the excuse to vote on his removal, which will happen because the Freedom Caucus is unhappy and the Democrats have no intention on saving McCarthy. \nIf it is not the border, it will be the debt ceiling. If McCarthy let’s the Freedom Caucus have their way, the US economy is in jeopardy. The non-Freedom Caucus will be the ones to motion to remove McCarthy.\nIs this by design? Definitely.", ">\n\nIt's not as if raising the debt ceiling is really a choice.\nDo you think Americans will see hypothetical default as Republicans' fault or Democrats'? Republicans are going to see it as Democrats' fault and vice versa, making it \"safe\" to force a default. Politically safe, the effect on the nation will be profound. How do you think independents will see this hypothetical default? Anyway, I see default as somewhat more likely than in the past because people are fully insulated from the truth in a way they haven't been before.", ">\n\nIndependents will be torn or undecided or possibly will blame both sides in my opinion. Independents do not seem as invested in politics as those involved with a party.", ">\n\nMy brother in Christ, you voted for him.", ">\n\nr/LeopardsAteMyFace", ">\n\nROLMFAO shit show", ">\n\nSo much corruption right in your face", ">\n\nThe room where it happened.", ">\n\nThe unveiling of the Ashli Babbitt Memorial Bust.", ">\n\nIf she is that concerned she can now call for a vote to vacate.", ">\n\nShe voted for McCarthy, fully aware of the situation with him having to appease the crazies.\nYet she still voted for him.\nI have zero sympathy for her complaints!", ">\n\nWhat wasn’t cut in the back room is the question.. even McCarthy’s wife is like, “wait, he want circumcised before this house vote”..", ">\n\nThey don't have the votes or unity to do anything but fight. They will continue to obstruct and have useless investigations like Bengazi multiple times and grandstand to make cable news. You know their usual.", ">\n\nPyrrhic victory comes to mind.", ">\n\nIt's too late, pals. The horse bolted already.", ">\n\nIt was ALL given away.", ">\n\nSounds the alarm on the best guy they could find, 15x in a row", ">\n\nLook, they dont have an agenda; they should just take a vote of no confidence in McCarthy next week, and go through that shit show for another week. \nand then do that again the week after.\nand get nothing done at all!", ">\n\nOne of the same house republicans that voted for the guy?", ">\n\nYeppers.", ">\n\nShallow state?", ">\n\nAll of them… think it and it’s probably true…", ">\n\nIts almost if the swamp is actually “compromise” and “negotiation” between differing powered interests", ">\n\nAnd will all of those who lost chairs trigger a vote for a new speaker?", ">\n\nYeah right, like they GAF", ">\n\nSounds like a question they should of asked last week.", ">\n\nHouse republicans are worried? Yeah right. This is exactly what they wanted. If they’re so fucking worried, why’d they vote for his goofy ass? \nMiss me with this bullshit.", ">\n\n...so why did you vote for him? I'm so fucking sick of Republicans pretending to be victims.", ">\n\nMatt Gaetz said he couldn’t think of anything else to ask for. Can you imagine? That is like having a genie and running out of wishes.", ">\n\n“What backroom deals were cut?”\n​\nBoth his testes", ">\n\n\"House Republican\" can motion for a new speaker", ">\n\nHey Gaetz. Ugly suit, my man. The hell is that", ">\n\n“Matt, you can GOPee in my mouth any time you want.”\n“Sounds great, Kevin, but can your daughter do it instead?”", ">\n\nGuess you woulda known and been able to axe any outlandish promises, but you decided to fall in line like the fucking pussies you are.", ">\n\nMcCarthy the Musical will have a weird Room where it happens song.", ">\n\nsounding the alarm after voting him in knowing very well prior to the vote some questionable deals were probably made.", ">\n\nRoflcopters. They don’t know?! Kevin was so desperate for votes that he made deals that none of those who were already voting for him knew what they entailed?", ">\n\nWhere the rules package debate and vote thread?", ">\n\nNothing he wasn’t already planning in doing. Now he gets to blame it on others!", ">\n\nOk, you can be the speaker, but I get your first edition charizard with the holograph.", ">\n\nTo get on his knee and call MTG, Gaetz, Bobert master.\nBasically become their lapdog", ">\n\nFascism marching forward to destroy democracy as they tried through coup attempt", ">\n\nIt's scary I not feel trust this", ">\n\nIt’s like The Room Where It Happened, only shitty", ">\n\nAll any one of them has to do is ask. If they don't get an answer they like, trigger a new vote. One person. Good job idiots. One single person can cripple new legislation.", ">\n\nMind you, she's absolutely going to support whatever it is. She just doesn't like being in the know.", ">\n\nFuck Republican voters. They did this.", ">\n\nMusta been his turn to generate a seemingly sane soundbyte.", ">\n\nThat feeling when you're being a good party member, voting as you've been told, and then all the perks go to the noisy, obnoxious, disruptive kids.\nThe squeaky wheel gets the cheese.", ">\n\nI'm too tired for all this anymore. Wake me up when the revolution starts.", ">\n\nI know: he gave them his balls on a silver platter and threw in his spine as a bonus.", ">\n\nThat would have been a good question to ask before voting for him", ">\n\nAny doubt that most media, right .. left .. whatever makes its money off fear-mongering using hearsay and rumors?", ">\n\nIt wasn't alarming enough to vote against McCarthy, though. Everyone knew McCarthy was cutting deals, we just didn't know what the deals were. If you are so concerned now, you should have been concerned then and voted for someone else.", ">\n\nHe had to have give a few topys , prolly a few up up the good old balloon knot", ">\n\nAll mccarthy had to do was court a few centrist corporate republicans instead of jacking off the far right magas. But he chose maga over bipartisanship. \nIts gonna be a shit show and he will deserve it", ">\n\nWell, just seeing m.t. cheezing it up with mccarthy for photo ops this week is not a good sign.", ">\n\nBut Nancy, you could have done the same, you didn't have to vote for McCarthy everytime, just make demands after other demands were honored.", ">\n\nImagine not trusting McCarthy but still voting for him 15 times.", ">\n\nThe treason republican party is selling out their own self now", ">\n\nDoes it really matter? After the GOP won the house, that really put the nail in the coffin for me. I’m done with media. It’s all fucking clickbait to divide Americans even more. If you have any brain cells, you would know that anything the House passes will ultimately be shot down by the Democratic majority in senate. It’s common sense morons. Stop getting so butt-hurt over this clickbait articles and trying to trash republicans and cause divide. I really wish there wasn’t a “party” system. Why can’t we just vote on a HUMAN for their beliefs. Fuck this whole party bullshit.", ">\n\n\nAfter the GOP won the senate\nthe Democratic majority in senate. \n\nPick one.", ">\n\nWhy didn't dems make a deal with Mccarthy to neuter the crazies from the MAGA wing?\nLike it or not, Gaetz won. The Dems should have gotten creative and gotten some concessions themselves.", ">\n\nRepublicans are fundamentally dishonest. Whatever concessions Democrats might have gotten would not be honored. Better for the Republicans' dishonesty gnaw upon itself.", ">\n\nI don't get that logic. You'd rather they crater to the MAGA wing and give them consessions?", ">\n\nThe logic is you don't vote for fascists who voted to keep Trump in office twice.", ">\n\nPolitics is tricky.\nDid the maga wing gain more power or not? Did the dems have a window to contain it by getting creative?\nEdit: I understand that the maga problem is at the foot of the Republicans and I am not sure that there was a play here for the Democrats. Just thinking outside of the box. Am I crazy to wish that our elected officials got creative to wrestle power away from those crazy fucks? It seemed for a minute the Republicans were equally frustrated. Chaos is a ladder!", ">\n\n\nPolitics is tricky.\n\nWould you say the same thing if it was 100 years ago and you were in Germany? Should they have made more concessions to the nazis to try to make them less of fascists? Or should they have fought harder against the fascists?\n\nIt seemed for a minute the Republicans were equally frustrated.\n\nPurely performative, not a single Republican tried to cross the aisle to vote for the moderate Jefferies. They all voted for fascists. Every. Single. One of them." ]

[]

[ "\"May.\"" ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?" ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody" ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it." ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\"." ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments." ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions." ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether." ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether.", ">\n\n\nIt comes as the US and European partners are looking to further ostracize both nations in the court of public opinion\n\nOh, you don't say" ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether.", ">\n\n\nIt comes as the US and European partners are looking to further ostracize both nations in the court of public opinion\n\nOh, you don't say", ">\n\nNot for lack of reason" ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether.", ">\n\n\nIt comes as the US and European partners are looking to further ostracize both nations in the court of public opinion\n\nOh, you don't say", ">\n\nNot for lack of reason", ">\n\nJust because Russia and Iran don't need help making themselves look bad doesn't mean we can't help them." ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether.", ">\n\n\nIt comes as the US and European partners are looking to further ostracize both nations in the court of public opinion\n\nOh, you don't say", ">\n\nNot for lack of reason", ">\n\nJust because Russia and Iran don't need help making themselves look bad doesn't mean we can't help them.", ">\n\nThis. Sometimes you have to be the better person, go that extra mile." ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether.", ">\n\n\nIt comes as the US and European partners are looking to further ostracize both nations in the court of public opinion\n\nOh, you don't say", ">\n\nNot for lack of reason", ">\n\nJust because Russia and Iran don't need help making themselves look bad doesn't mean we can't help them.", ">\n\nThis. Sometimes you have to be the better person, go that extra mile.", ">\n\nWelp, sounds like we need some oil. Strap in folks." ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether.", ">\n\n\nIt comes as the US and European partners are looking to further ostracize both nations in the court of public opinion\n\nOh, you don't say", ">\n\nNot for lack of reason", ">\n\nJust because Russia and Iran don't need help making themselves look bad doesn't mean we can't help them.", ">\n\nThis. Sometimes you have to be the better person, go that extra mile.", ">\n\nWelp, sounds like we need some oil. Strap in folks.", ">\n\nGet the rip its ready." ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether.", ">\n\n\nIt comes as the US and European partners are looking to further ostracize both nations in the court of public opinion\n\nOh, you don't say", ">\n\nNot for lack of reason", ">\n\nJust because Russia and Iran don't need help making themselves look bad doesn't mean we can't help them.", ">\n\nThis. Sometimes you have to be the better person, go that extra mile.", ">\n\nWelp, sounds like we need some oil. Strap in folks.", ">\n\nGet the rip its ready.", ">\n\nMAY be? So they aren't sure yet?" ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether.", ">\n\n\nIt comes as the US and European partners are looking to further ostracize both nations in the court of public opinion\n\nOh, you don't say", ">\n\nNot for lack of reason", ">\n\nJust because Russia and Iran don't need help making themselves look bad doesn't mean we can't help them.", ">\n\nThis. Sometimes you have to be the better person, go that extra mile.", ">\n\nWelp, sounds like we need some oil. Strap in folks.", ">\n\nGet the rip its ready.", ">\n\nMAY be? So they aren't sure yet?", ">\n\nWeird to broadcast to the public a statement so evidently incorrect. Perhaps the MAY is a warning that an IS is coming and when the IS arrives it will come a grumpy expression. \"Watch out Iran there may be definite words on the horizon and you may be in range of our disdain. Take cover, disdain may be imminent.\"" ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether.", ">\n\n\nIt comes as the US and European partners are looking to further ostracize both nations in the court of public opinion\n\nOh, you don't say", ">\n\nNot for lack of reason", ">\n\nJust because Russia and Iran don't need help making themselves look bad doesn't mean we can't help them.", ">\n\nThis. Sometimes you have to be the better person, go that extra mile.", ">\n\nWelp, sounds like we need some oil. Strap in folks.", ">\n\nGet the rip its ready.", ">\n\nMAY be? So they aren't sure yet?", ">\n\nWeird to broadcast to the public a statement so evidently incorrect. Perhaps the MAY is a warning that an IS is coming and when the IS arrives it will come a grumpy expression. \"Watch out Iran there may be definite words on the horizon and you may be in range of our disdain. Take cover, disdain may be imminent.\"", ">\n\nI don't think that government that lives and thrives under sanctions for decades, and executes everyone who speaks against it cares about IS. They are quite certain that trade with other scummy governments will be enough." ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether.", ">\n\n\nIt comes as the US and European partners are looking to further ostracize both nations in the court of public opinion\n\nOh, you don't say", ">\n\nNot for lack of reason", ">\n\nJust because Russia and Iran don't need help making themselves look bad doesn't mean we can't help them.", ">\n\nThis. Sometimes you have to be the better person, go that extra mile.", ">\n\nWelp, sounds like we need some oil. Strap in folks.", ">\n\nGet the rip its ready.", ">\n\nMAY be? So they aren't sure yet?", ">\n\nWeird to broadcast to the public a statement so evidently incorrect. Perhaps the MAY is a warning that an IS is coming and when the IS arrives it will come a grumpy expression. \"Watch out Iran there may be definite words on the horizon and you may be in range of our disdain. Take cover, disdain may be imminent.\"", ">\n\nI don't think that government that lives and thrives under sanctions for decades, and executes everyone who speaks against it cares about IS. They are quite certain that trade with other scummy governments will be enough.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 41%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nWhile it did not signal a policy shift, the charge marked some of the sharpest US rhetoric against Iran since it began providing weapons to Russia to support its nearly year-long war in Ukraine.\nSullivan said Iran had chosen \"To go down a road where their weapons are being used to kill civilians in Ukraine and to try to plunge cities into cold and darkness, which, from our point of view, puts Iran in a place where it could potentially be contributing to widespread war crimes.\"\nSullivan pointed to European and US sanctions on Iran put in place after the US exposed Iran's weapons sales to Russia last year as examples of how they are trying to \"Make these transactions more difficult.\" But he acknowledged that \"The way that they are actually carrying them out physically makes physical interdiction a challenge.\"\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Iran^#1 Russia^#2 weapons^#3 Sullivan^#4 Ukraine^#5" ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether.", ">\n\n\nIt comes as the US and European partners are looking to further ostracize both nations in the court of public opinion\n\nOh, you don't say", ">\n\nNot for lack of reason", ">\n\nJust because Russia and Iran don't need help making themselves look bad doesn't mean we can't help them.", ">\n\nThis. Sometimes you have to be the better person, go that extra mile.", ">\n\nWelp, sounds like we need some oil. Strap in folks.", ">\n\nGet the rip its ready.", ">\n\nMAY be? So they aren't sure yet?", ">\n\nWeird to broadcast to the public a statement so evidently incorrect. Perhaps the MAY is a warning that an IS is coming and when the IS arrives it will come a grumpy expression. \"Watch out Iran there may be definite words on the horizon and you may be in range of our disdain. Take cover, disdain may be imminent.\"", ">\n\nI don't think that government that lives and thrives under sanctions for decades, and executes everyone who speaks against it cares about IS. They are quite certain that trade with other scummy governments will be enough.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 41%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nWhile it did not signal a policy shift, the charge marked some of the sharpest US rhetoric against Iran since it began providing weapons to Russia to support its nearly year-long war in Ukraine.\nSullivan said Iran had chosen \"To go down a road where their weapons are being used to kill civilians in Ukraine and to try to plunge cities into cold and darkness, which, from our point of view, puts Iran in a place where it could potentially be contributing to widespread war crimes.\"\nSullivan pointed to European and US sanctions on Iran put in place after the US exposed Iran's weapons sales to Russia last year as examples of how they are trying to \"Make these transactions more difficult.\" But he acknowledged that \"The way that they are actually carrying them out physically makes physical interdiction a challenge.\"\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Iran^#1 Russia^#2 weapons^#3 Sullivan^#4 Ukraine^#5", ">\n\nSullivan is a war criminal and so is the USA government including the president. Delivering weapons to a criminal country full of extremist right-wingers." ]

[ "\"May.\"", ">\n\nLike the weatherman's, \"It may rain tomorrow\"?", ">\n\nTo surprise of nobody", ">\n\nEurope is the one providing military and economic aid as well as taking good care of millions of refugees. EU would be enable to do any of that if energy crisis was worse. Not to mention Ukraine's pipeline network keeps Russian gas flowing to Europe and Ukraine receives \\~$2-3b in transit fees for it.", ">\n\nAnd that last mention supposed to shift a bit of blame on Ukraine? Oh do tell, how swiftly aid for Ukraine would cease to exist, if Ukraine decided to stop transition, pretty much dooming Europe to search for alternatives ASAP. Or, how would people feel about supporting \"those pieces of shit that decided to freeze us\".", ">\n\nThe opposite. Last mention is supposed to show how stupid \"still trading with Russia = also at fault\" logic is. Ukraine can't cut Russian gas going to Europe for the exact same reason European leaders can't cut it themselves. It harms the economy, it harms people, it would reduce public support for Ukraine and it's a fast-track to far-right governments.", ">\n\nOh, my apologies for jumping to conclusions.", ">\n\nGermany has stopped importing Russian gas altogether.", ">\n\n\nIt comes as the US and European partners are looking to further ostracize both nations in the court of public opinion\n\nOh, you don't say", ">\n\nNot for lack of reason", ">\n\nJust because Russia and Iran don't need help making themselves look bad doesn't mean we can't help them.", ">\n\nThis. Sometimes you have to be the better person, go that extra mile.", ">\n\nWelp, sounds like we need some oil. Strap in folks.", ">\n\nGet the rip its ready.", ">\n\nMAY be? So they aren't sure yet?", ">\n\nWeird to broadcast to the public a statement so evidently incorrect. Perhaps the MAY is a warning that an IS is coming and when the IS arrives it will come a grumpy expression. \"Watch out Iran there may be definite words on the horizon and you may be in range of our disdain. Take cover, disdain may be imminent.\"", ">\n\nI don't think that government that lives and thrives under sanctions for decades, and executes everyone who speaks against it cares about IS. They are quite certain that trade with other scummy governments will be enough.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 41%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nWhile it did not signal a policy shift, the charge marked some of the sharpest US rhetoric against Iran since it began providing weapons to Russia to support its nearly year-long war in Ukraine.\nSullivan said Iran had chosen \"To go down a road where their weapons are being used to kill civilians in Ukraine and to try to plunge cities into cold and darkness, which, from our point of view, puts Iran in a place where it could potentially be contributing to widespread war crimes.\"\nSullivan pointed to European and US sanctions on Iran put in place after the US exposed Iran's weapons sales to Russia last year as examples of how they are trying to \"Make these transactions more difficult.\" But he acknowledged that \"The way that they are actually carrying them out physically makes physical interdiction a challenge.\"\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Iran^#1 Russia^#2 weapons^#3 Sullivan^#4 Ukraine^#5", ">\n\nSullivan is a war criminal and so is the USA government including the president. Delivering weapons to a criminal country full of extremist right-wingers.", ">\n\nIraq vibes intensify" ]