Nancy Pelosi on Vulgar Calls for Impeaching President Trump

Newly elected House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tried to tamp down the controversy  created by freshman Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib's vulgar call to impeach President Trump.

Pelosi dismissed criticism of Tlaib's vow to impeach the "motherf*cker as being "No big deal" as it was free speech from an individual and is just the way people talk




However, Pelosi proclaimed that President Trump's rhetoric mattered as his words have a direct impact on people. Huh? Hypocrisy much?  

Perhaps Pelosi ought to consider the context of Rashida Tlaib's crude call for impeachment.  Even though Tlaib doubled down on her remarks as speaking truth to power, the reality was that her crude comment was directed to her young son.   So such free speech has no impact "on the children"?  Sure. 

h/t: MRC

"Young Turk" Rep. Rashida Tlaib Ready to Rumble in the House

Rashida Tlaib heckling Trump in 2016

First term Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-MI 13th) rose to prominence being the first Muslim woman in the Michigan legislature.  She first achieved national notoriety for heckling candidate Donald Trump at a Detroit Economic Club luncheon in August 2016.  Tlaib parlayed that protest into winning the 2018 House Democrat primary in a crowded race for a seat that represents Dearborn, Michigan in a crowded primary , which has a large Muslim population.

Tlaib ran unopposed in the 2018 general election and was one of two Muslim women elected to the House. Tlaib was sworn in on President Thomas Jefferson's Quran. As Rep. Tlaib was sworn in, her brother spoke to CSPAN to say that he was proud of her being a fighter despite the fact the he was a Trump conservative. 




Tlaib certainly lived up to that young turk reputation on her first day in office.  While Tlaib did vote for Speaker Pelosi (despite what she said on the stump),  Tlaib did make waves by modifying her House provided world map by inserting Palestine, backing her position for a one state solution.

Later that day, Tlaib made headlines at a Move On.org  reception when she called for President Trump's impeachment by a profanity laced ejaculation.  Tlaib lived up to her reputation for cursing like a trucker. But Tlaib should only metaphorically be labeled a young Turk as she proudly professes her Palestinian identity.

Most politicos expected the 116th Congress to be totally focused on the upcoming 2020 Presidential election, full of investigations and efforts to oust President Trump. Democrats seem to be obsessed by Trump Derangement Syndrome.  The hope is to persuade enough establishment Republicans who are offended by Trump's abrasive style and perceived lack of comity to limit Trump's term as chief executive.

Establishment Democrats may try to tamp down impeachment efforts, as the chances to force Mr. Trump from the Oval Office with a 2/3rds Senate majority seem slim.  It is reasonable to presume that their game will be to continue to drive down President Trump's favorability numbers and to pressure those close to him that he will throw in the towel.  Alas that strategy will not satisfy radicals like Rashida Tlaib.

The problem that young turks like Tlaib pose is their persistent in your face vulgar approach is great for generating headlines (much the same for their nemesis Donald Trump).  But that turns off independents and establishment Republicans who embrace civility.  Ironically, Democrats condemned Republicans about their supposed lack of civility in the wake of the shooting of former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ 8th).

Moreover, the more prominence that  Democrat Socialist radicals like Tlaib and Rep. Ocasio Cortez (D-NY 14th) are given, it is likely that the Democrats will be driven to the left, which will produce a presidential nominee who who the base loves but alienates any remaining Blue Dog Democrats and fails to win back "The Great Revolt" Trump voters and loses in a landslide, much like McGovern lost to the great silent majority in 1972.

When Winning Isn't Enough for Ocasio-Cortez

Congresswoman-Elect Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-NY 14th), a 29 year old Democrat Socialist who hails from The Bronx, New York, won her general election with 78% of the vote.  Yet her initial comments either indicated an unpreparedness for victory or a pose to propagandize her brand.

Due to the demographics of the district, it was virtually fait accompli that Ocasio Cortez would win in November after surprising House Democrat stalwart Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY 14th) by 15% in the June 2018 New York primaries.  Yet after she won, Ocasio Cortez publicly complained that she would not have income for three months, so it would be initially dicey for her to find digs in DC prior to her "inauguration" (sic). 

So an economics major from Boston University from Boston University could not budget enough buffer for a sure thing victory in order to have a place to stay in the District of Calamity prior to pulling her first paycheck  Sure.

Detractors of the rising Democrat Socialist star have derided her as Occasional Cortez, who they believe is not bright nor schooled in the political process.  However, the wording of her "too broke to move" sob story hint that it is contrived political posturing.

Ocasio Cortez comes from the Bernie Sanders wing of the Democrat Party (despite the fact that Sanders actually is no longer a member of the party).  Aside from her chops of being a community organizer, Ocasio Cortez tries to conjure the mien of being considered a working class hero.  What better way to identify with voters who live paycheck to paycheck to play up this wage gap before taking office?

This would not be the first time that Ocasio Cortez has played fast and loose with her bio to identify with the downtrodden.  Ocasio Cortez played up her roots in the Bronx, even after it became evident that she grew up living with her  architect father in well to do Westchester County while commuting to school in the Bronx. 

If Ocasio Cortez truly cannot afford an apartment before she is "viviendo del mamey" (Boricuan slang for living off the state budget, or living the easy life), she could follow the example of outgoing House Speaker Paul Ryan, who slept in his office.  Surely the DNC has a room that they can set aside for the newly elected working class leader.  Just make sure that you pay the average daily rate for lodging lest you get hounded and forced to resign like former Trump Energy Secretary Scott Pruitt.  Check that, ethics rules usually only apply for Republicans.

Ocasio Cortez's post election kerfluffle may hint at trouble for Democrats organizing in Washington.  It would seem that Ocasio Cortez is not content to be a back bencher while learning the ropes on Capitol Hill.  

 It seems that there are three contending factions in the Democrat Caucus:  The old school, like presumed Speaker Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 12th) and current Democrat Whip Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD 5th), who are established Democrats who are eager to regain their powerful positions. 

While it is a relatively small faction, there are moderates like Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH 13th), who seem like vestigial Democrats of old who champion patriotic union working class voters.  Their clout may be somewhat bolstered by the fact that many of the newly elected Democrats won because of their moderate credentials.  

Then there are the Young Turks, like Ocasio Cortez, who want the revolution now. Losing Democrat Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO), labeled them the crazies.  These rabble rousers will not wait their turn for power.  They may chaff at having their leadership being comprised of septuagenarian establishment types who want to protect their positions rather than upturning the system.  

The question is how the (Democrat) Congressional Black Caucus will side in the leadership battle.  On the one hand, the CBC has paid their dues and followed a strategy of rising to ranking member status by hanging onto office forever (save ex Rep. John Conyers, who was chased out of office in late 2017 after fifty years because of sexual harassment allegations).   Congresswoman "Auntie Maxie" Waters (D-CA 43rd) is in line to be the Chair of the Financial Services Committee, so she has strong motivations to line up with the establishment.  But Waters also was a driving force during the Midterms to chant "Impeach 45".   Ms. Pelosi was trying to tamp down those voices during the campaign.  If House Democrats intend to govern, leadership may strive to quash those sentiments, which could cause resentment and a change of alliance.

In the last 115th Congress, the CBC felt slighted in leadership.  House Democrats made up a faux leadership position for Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC 6th) as "Assistant Democrat Leader", but who had  a title but little clout.  It is unclear if that will be enough for the CBC now that they are back at the helm in the House. Fourth term incumbent Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY 8th) is vying  to succeed Joe Crowley for the number four position in the Democrat Caucus as Caucus Chair.  This might split the CBC as Jeffries competitor includes entrenched left coast progressive CBC member  Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA 13th). 

Next week, Democrats will return to the Capitol City and organize their caucus.  Either Ocasio Cortez will have to couch surf or get a cash advance to participate.   

On Re-Evaluating House Leadership

The Old Grey Lady on the Ossified House Democrat Leadership

Pondering Pelosi's Political Prognostications

In an interview with the Boston Globe, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 12th) boldly predicted that the Democrats would regain control of the lower chamber of Congress and that she would again become Speaker. 





Democrats need to gain 24 seats to achieve this goal. There are 23 Republican districts which Hillary Clinton won in the 2016 cycle.  In addition, the incumbent party typically loses seats in mid term elections during a President's first term. Some have also interpreted the number of Republican retirements (including Speaker Paul Ryan) as GOP insiders concerns about losing power in a Blue Wave.

 Ms. Pelosi was elected as the 52nd Speaker in 2007 and served until 2011 when the Republicans took over in the 112th Congress.

Although there are many positive signs to bolster Democrats ambitions to win the House, there are other factors which are difficult to currently quantify.

Last summer, Democrats sought to re-brand their messages as "A Better Deal"  which was going to couch their progressive politics in economic terms of better jobs, better wages and a better future.  What is unsaid in the sloganeering is this would be achieved by bigger government and more regulations.  To further that campaign sleight of hand, Democrats sought to recruit lots of veterans as candidates and have them run as ersatz Republicans, like in the Pennsylvania 18th special election earlier this year. 

[L] House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 12th) [R] Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announce Democrats 2018 election rebranding "A Better Deal"  July 24, 2017

The problem with that strategy is that it seems to be supersceded by the prominent progressive politics as embodied by Ms Pelosi and the ramparts of the Resistance.  Democrats seem ready to grab guns, considering their alignment with the post Parkland Florida "Gun Reform Now" movement.  Pelosi is the embodiment of progressive politics, so independent and crossover voters can clearly conceive of the politics they are empowering. 


Despite Minority Leader Pelosi's attempts to tamp down talk of impeachment, it is a fair assumption that in the height of campaigning on the hustings, progressive candidates will hawk impeachment as red meat for their left leaning voters.  This may well alienate voters who crossed over party lines to vote for Trump as defined by Salena Zito as "The Great Revolt" (2018).

One other problem for Pelosi is to lock up her caucus in a 116th Congress.  There was a boomlet for alternatives to Nancy Pelosi's leadership of the Democrat Caucus.  Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH 13th previously 17th) indicated that he may challenge Pelosi.  Ryan represents Youngstown, and would represent many blue collar voters who participated in the Great Revolt which swung the 2016 Presidential election to Donald Trump.   If more of "The Resistance" inspired Democrats win, even a 79 year old 16 term San Francisco Congresswoman  might not be radical enough for them in the 116th Congress.

Nancy Pelosi Tries to Drag Out the Vote With Ru Paul

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi chose to be a guest judge on Ru Paul's Drag Race All Stars. Her brief message was to "Get Out The Vote".   That is really some niche marketing for the mid-terms!





Of course, Democrats will argue that they are hyping up the hustings for the youth vote, especially those who are inclined to watch programming on VH1.  But it is hard to sell Pelosi as being hip and happening as the former Speaker of the House continually has trouble remembering exactly who currently inhabits the White House. 

Democrats allies in the mainstream media have been pushing a narrative about a "Blue Wave" in the 2018 off year elections which will sweep progressives back into power.  If that is so inevitable then it makes one wonder why Democrat leaders would need to go on Ru Paul's show, which focuses on transvestites.  


While such outreach may satisfy progressive whims, it alienates blue collar traditional values voters, the demographic which was decisive in electing President Donald Trump.  Then again, progressive elements of the Democrat Party have made Blue Dogs an endangered species. That impetus complicates Democrats gaining control of the Senate (and may well cost West Virginia  Senator Joe Manchin his seat). And it is dubious if suburban voters will be ginned up to for eight months to get to the polls over a pandering appearance as a drag race judge. 

It is highly unlikely that  Pelosi's shout out to drag queens  will motive young voters to get out to the polls in November.  But those who are scandalized by pandering to the fringes will long remember Pelosi trying to drag out the vote.

Does Hope for "A Better Deal" Scuttle Bipartisan Budgetary Cooperation?

Nancy Pelosi on on the DNC Election Rigging Allegations

D-List Celebutard Tries to Get Ahead By Overstepping Comedic Line Towards Trump

Many progressives have shown difficulty in accepting Donald J. Trump as President of the United States.  House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 8th) can not bring herself to say "President Trump".  When former First Lady/Senator/Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D-NY) is not engaged in chardonnay therapy, she was attempting to front "the Resistance" as part of a inchoate attempt at remaining politically viable.

Celebrities certainly have had a tough time coping with not having their candidate win the White House in 2016.   Of late, there was Robert De Niro's rousing graduation analogy at Brown University that the newly minted Ivy League alums are now entering a world that is a "tragic dumb assed comedy."

Hyperbolic histrionics does not sate some from Hollyweird. Some celebutards feel compelled to push their consternation to the brink.  At the enormous Women who Hate Trump march the day after inauguration, Madonna intimated that she had dreams of bombing the White House after hearing of Trump's victory.  Not to be outdone, D-List comedienne Kathy Griffin posed for publicity shoots holding a bloody facsimile of America's 45th President of the United States, which she then posted on social media. Smooth move Ex-Lax.

No doubt, Griffin thought that she would be playing to her progressively oriented base and perhaps even make it off the D-List through political notoriety. After all, her bloody head pose echoed the antipathy of "The Resistance". She had the reputation of being a crass, shock type comedienne. Moreover, she could claim artistic freedom and the need to challenge boundaries in the name of comedy.  Not so much.

Consider the comedic rodeo rider who dared wear an Obama mask while maintaining the ring which caused a week's controversy and caused him to be put into diversity training. It did not help that Griffin's  graphic art echoed actual executions as infamously performed by ISIS. The country still seems to have some respect for the office of President.  One should not discount the reputation of the messenger.  Griffith is not known for taking overt political stances, and this stunt may have been seen as distasteful grandstanding by an opportunist.

Social media turned against Kathy Griffin for her ghoulish pose.  Sponsors and venues quickly started to cancel on her. Even Senator Al Franken (D-MN) was said to be backing away from a associations with with Griffin.  The Secret Service may now be quite investigating Griffin's graphic wise crack. 

What's more, is that Griffin's grotesquerie made Mr. Trump somewhat sympathetic, even to ardent opponents of the Trump Administration.   Former Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) could point to the gross graphic and condemn the repugnant and vile message in his quixotic hope for civic civility.  Mr. Trump tweeted in response to the controversy that his eleven year old son was having a hard time with this sick humor.

When it was clear that the public tide had turned against Griffin, she quickly posted on Instagram an apology.





Liberal leaning news organizations barely covered the controversy because one of the news most important powers is the power to ignore the inconvenient or incongruent.

It is difficult to discern the best course of action.  On the one hand, while I strive to be forgiving and let bygones to be bygones, it seems inappropriate to think "Aw shucks, it was nothing."   This is not a typo tweet like "covfefe"  or a knee jerk post which one regrets immediately after hitting the send button.  TMZ showed Griffin in a full blown photo shoot, with lighting, make-up and props. This was pre-meditated so to magnanimously dismiss it invites future pot shots from an opposition which seems intent to throw anything up on the wall to see if it sticks.

On the other hand, Mr. Trump has displayed a churlish reputation in the past and has used antagonisms with others (Rosie O'Donnell, Megyn Kelly, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz, et ali.) as a means to brandish himself while sullying others.  The Trump Administration needs to put some wins on the board in Washington aside from a SCOTUS pick and reversing 18 prior Administrative Actions.

May Kathy Griffin be benched on the D-List without needlessly encouraging others to go down that same repugnant road. 

Democrats Said to Be Up and Cummings (sic)

MSNBC's Donnie Deutsch asked Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD 7th) who were the rising stars of the Democrat Party.  The Baltimore Democrat gave an eyebrow raising list:

It was curious that two of the up and Cummings (sic) stars of the Democrat Party in the District of Calamity had haunted the halls of Congress for years.  It seems strange to consider Rep. Barbara Lee (D-13th) as a rising star, considering her 22 years in Congress.  She was infamous for voting against going to war after the terror attacks of 2001. But maybe just missing being voted Vice Chair of the DNC gave her that stature in Cumming's mind.

There is some merit in citing Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA 28th) as a rising star.  His stature as the Ranking Member on the House Intelligence Committee gives him a place of prominence when making television hits, particularly regarding Benghazi and accusations of Russia electoral interference.  But this is Schiff's 8th term, so he's hardly a rising star.

Then there is Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA).  Had Hillary Clinton won the 2016 election, Kaine would have been Vice President, and spoken of in reverential tones like the predecessor former Vice President Joe Biden.  But that fate was not to be. Kaine distinguished himself as being a disagreeable debater during his match up against his counterpart, then Governor (now Vice President) Mike Pence (R-IN). This compensated for Kaine's charisma deficit during most of the 2016 General Election campaign.  After the electoral defeat, Kaine declined to take a position of prominence amongst DC Democrats, yet Cummings cites him as a up and coming Democrat star.



All three of these Up and Cummings stars seemed to have thrown their lot in with the progressive wing of the Democrat party.  In the past, Kaine had been known for some moderate as well as liberal positions, but the inclination for being a squish seems to have past. Of course, Blue Dog Democrats are dead in the eyes of most Democrat loyalists. If Democrats were keen on a fresher face in DC, they could turn to Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH 13), a blue collar Democrat from Youngstown/Akron who made a quixotic bid to unseat Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 12th) from being House Minority Leader.  Between Ryan's willingness to consider working with the GOP on some bills where there is mutual agreement and payback for challenging the leader (and losing), it is no surprise that Ryan of Ohio was not mentioned.

It is telling that DC Democrats only looked among themselves for rising stars, instead of looking of not looking between the beltways.  But considering how many seats Democrats have lost since President Barack Obama, there may not be many success stories to which to point.

DC Republicans may be in trouble with voters unless they can achieve some successes with health care, taxes, and immigration issues.  But if the Up and Cummings pols  are really the bench for DC Democrats, I weep for their future.

On Blue Dogs and Beltway Democrats Being on the Endangered Species List

The Blue Dog Coalition was formed in 1995 in reaction to devastating losses in President Clinton's first mid-term election.  The moniker played off of the expression "Yellow Dog Democrats" of the South who were so loyal to the party after the Civil War.   Blue Dogs could also refer to the idea that when dogs are not let in the house, they stay outside in the cold and turn blue.   

The Blue Dogs sought to find a compromise between conservative and liberal positions.  They tended to be Democrats who were from rural districts who were pro-guns, pro-life and fiscal hawks. Blue Dogs were successful in 1996 and then Democrat National Committee Chairman Rahm Emmanuel used Blue Dogs to retake the House in 2006. 

However, in the same 2006 election cycle, progressive began to retake the Democrat Party.  A Progressive candidate beat Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CN) in the Democrat primary, forcing the veteran lawmaker (who was quite an orthodox liberal except on staunch support for Israel and being a war hawk) to successfully run as an "Independent Democrat" in the general election. But this bode as a bad omen for Blue Dog Democrats.

At their  high water mark, Blue Dog Democrats had 44 members, which was roughly 20% of the Democrat Caucus.  But progressive tides and internecine battles have lowered Blue Dogs ranks to 17 members which again puts them out in the cold. 


At the beginning of the 115th Congress, Representative Tim Ryan (D-OH 13th formerly 17th) sought to run for House Minority Leader against the incumbent Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-12th formerly 5th & 8th).  The final vote was for unseating Pelosi  not even close 134-63.  

Considering the way that close to 70 Democrats (all from safe Democrat districts) boycotted President Trump's inaugural festivities shows that Congressional Democrats seem dedicated to the progressive cause, under the delusion that they will retake the House in the 2018 elections.  

The Democrats continue to be obsessed with gun control, abortion rights, liberal immigration and an ever expanding government.Thus it seems that Democrats continue to count on winning urban voters along with educated white collar suburban voters in their path to victory.  This sort strategy leaves Blue Dog in the cold, forcing them to accept  irrelevance amongst the DC Democrat party or to go against their tradition and aversions to vote GOP to remain relevant.

It was fascinating to see how 2016 Democrat Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton (D-NY) ran against coal country in her futile bid for the White House.  Hillary lost the Keystone State by about 46,000 votes.  That slim margin of victory may have been taken from President Trump's increased support in Central Pennsylvania, which epitomized Blue Dog Coalition voters.

In  Washington Examiner, Salina Zito noted how Cambria County, Pennsylvania, which contains the old industrial city of Johnstown, has shifted from being a 70 reliably Democrat area in 2006 to today being a 70% Republican area. It is these working class white voters that Democrat strategist Dane Strother worries that imposing a progressive purity test will drive Democrats into the political wilderness for forty years.  


President Trump may have sensed the alienation that Blue Dogs (who also comprised "Reagan Democrats" in the 1980s) felt, and now seeks to cement the relationship with them.  Thus the overtures to labor leaders and winning back manufacturing jobs as well as fulfilling campaign promises which validate voters who then candidate  Barack Obama derided as those who were "Bitter Clingers" to their bibles and their guns.

Kevin McCarthy on House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi

Nancy Pelosi on an Impeachment of "President" Hillary Clinton

What Makes for a Good Speaker?

After four and a half years as Speaker of the House, Rep. John Boehner (R-OH 8th) announced his resignation. Boehner allegedly wanted to resign after the 112th Congress but his handpicked heir, seven term incumbent  former Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA 7th), but he was ignominously upset by Rep. Dave Brat (R-VA 7th) in the Republican Primary. So  Boehner blustered that he wanted to resign after the pinnacle of his career in hosting Pope Francis to speak before a joint session of Congress.  Of course, this “Zip-a-Dee Doo Dah” excuse conveniently ignores the looming Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC 11th) Motion to Vacate the Chair, which the Speaker would either lose or have to win with Democrat votes. Boehner gave a month for his resignation to take effect in late October, 2015.

It is a good thing that Speaker Boehner gave a month to let things shake it.  Everything was arranged for Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA 23rd prior 22nd) to assume the big chair. But then McCarthy opened his big mouth during a friendly interview with Sean Hannity in which inartful articulation about Hillary Clinton blew two years of non-partisan investigation by House Select Benghazi Committee chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC 4th).

McCarthy’s gaffe enlarged a gulf between the House Republican establishment and the Freedom Caucus, which was reluctant to back a Cocktail Party candidate.   The Freedom Caucus had been poised to support Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL 8th), who is less conservative then the Freedom Caucus but open to rules reform.  However, before the Republican Caucus secretly voted on their choice, McCarthy suddenly resigned and the vote never took place.

In the aftermath of this announcement, there was pressure to draft House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI 1st) from divergent voices like Trey Gowdy and Mitt Romeny. But Ryan   was leery about leading what some might characterize as a den of vipers to spend lots of his time fundraising away from family.  Ryan took a week to decide his druthers.  Ryan announced that he would run if his candidacy would unite the party and under certain conditions (such as reducing his extra congressional travel).



Paul Ryan was hailed as a conservative when he was chosen to be former Governor Mitt Romney’s (R-MA) running mate in 2012, yet was run down by some radicalized conservatives for his stance reformist inclinations on immigration.  As Ryan readied himself to possibly assume the Speakership, he tapped  David Hoppe, a veteran conservative who now works at the Heritage Foundation to be his  chief of staff. Yet even this move was characterized by discontented populists as “picking a Washington lobbyist”.  Moreover, some said that the Freedom Caucus would be sell outs if they backed Paul Ryan for speaker. But a super majority (but not 80%) of the Freedom Caucus expressed willingness to support Ryan for Speaker so the Wisconsin Congressman put his name forward for consideration.

Keeping these recent events in mind, it would be wise to discern what makes for a good Speaker. Some would claim, res ipsa loquitur, that the person must be able to speak.  Thus, Kevin McCarthy’s disjointed utterances should have disqualified him. There is no doubt that the Hannity snafu killed McCarthy’s bid to be Speaker.  But it was not because he was not articulate in his utterances.  Former Democrat House Speaker and now Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 12th prior 5th and 8th) was not a skilled speaker but was on message and ruled her caucus with an iron fist (and is aided by a sympathetic mainstream media).  Looking back into recent history, Rep. Denny Hastert was not chosen to be the chief spokesman for Republicans or the House.  Neither was Rep. Tom Foley (D-WA 5th).

On the other hand, Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA 6th), Rep. Jim Wright (D-TX 12th) and Rep. Tip O’Neil (D-MA 8th) were able media front men while being Speaker.  So being clean, well spoken and  articulate, to borrow a compliment from Vice President Joe Biden, can augment the Speaker’s role but is not quintessential.

A second trait often associated with the House Speakership is as a fundraiser.  This would have been a task that Rep. Kevin McCarthy would have excelled at, lest the Benghazi bungle.  Boehner seems to have done well at raising funds, particularly for those who would support establishment leadership.  But this party role is something which Rep. Paul Ryan did not relish.  Obviously, it is ancillary to the job of being Speaker of the House and constitutionally the second in the line of succession to the Presidency.

A third quality associated with being Speaker is setting priorities.  Newt Gingrich was legionary for nationalizing the 1994 cycle and voting on the Contract with America in the first 100 days of the 104th Congress. Nancy Pelosi rallied her caucus in supporting legislation which impeded the waning George W. Bush administration in the 110th Congress and facilitated President Barack Obama’s agenda in the 111th Congress.

While current Speaker John Boehner has done some things to quell conservatives in the GOP caucus, like eventually launching the Benghazi Select Committee, suing about Obamacare and recently establishing a select committee to study Planned Parenthood abuses, his style tended to be top down and accommodating the powers that be in the White House. For instance, the lawsuit on Obamacare is window dressing with little chance of success (as it is a political issue that courts will eschew).  Congress voted many times to repeal Obamacare, but it was not really attached to budgets or fought for doggedly in conference committees.

Boehner also reneged on understandings which irked the base and conservatives.  For instance, Boehner repeatedly broke the Hastert Rule (bills must receive a majority of the majority to be put on the floor).  This meant that legislation passed with Democrat votes. Boehner would also jam down bills, like a continuing resolution or other lengthy legislation without giving members (and the public) three days to read it before voting.  So, to echo Nancy Pelosi on Obamacare, “We have to vote on the bill before we know what is in it.”.  Not a wise way to run a railroad.

Many rank-and-file conservatives wanted one of their own to be Speaker.  So social media pushed Trey Gowdy or Freedom Caucus leader Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH 4th).  This is under the assumption that a true Conservative would dominate the GOP caucus and get things done.

[L] Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH 4th) [R] Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID 1st) [photo: BD Matt]

Well, the popular press has branded the Freedom Caucus as being ultra-right wingers bent on their own way.  But at the October Conservation with Conservatives presser, Rep. Raul Labrador (R-ID 1st) struck a much more restrained set of expectations.  The Freedom Caucus realized that with unity of around 38 votes they had a certain amount of power, to deny a candidate the requisite 218 votes, but they could not successfully back one of their own as Speaker.

It may seem strange that a Republican member generally considered an up and coming Conservative like Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT 3rd) only got lukewarm support in his bid for Speaker, as the Freedom Caucus was initially poised to back Rep. Daniel Webster, who had a 57% Liberty rating.  Rather than have a conservative warrior in the big chair, they wanted someone who would hear their voice.

What really bothered members of the Freedom Caucus was process issues.  They were tired of being shut out in the Committee process, not being able to advance their own legislation or  offer amendments during mark-ups. Ironically, this was not always because their amendments might lose, but that they could carry the day and ruin the pre-baked cake that House leadership had concocted with their counterparts in the Senate or across Pennsylvania Avenue.

Webster promised to have a bottom up leadership process and that influenced the Freedom Caucus.  While Ryan issued some daring demands (like get rid of the Motion to Vacate the Chair), he seems to have mollified the Freedom Caucus.  Scuttlebutt is that Ryan promised to not raise immigration reform until there is a new President. Politico reported that the Freedom Caucus and Ryan agreed in principle on most items and the Freedom Caucus would have some “buy in” on legislation, but his candidacy was still “take it or leave it”.  That was still good enough for 70% of the House Freedom Caucus.

This meeting of the minds did not win over all anti-establishment Republicans.  Rush Limbaugh posulated that to donor class got what they wanted in Paul Ryan.  Glenn Beck accused the Freedom Caucus of being sell-outs. But Beck wanted the House to look outside of its chambers to find a leader, by endorsing Senator Ben Sasse's (R-NB) modest proposal to draft AEI President Arthur Brooks.  In addition, Mark Levin railed at Ryan for never meeting a bailout he did not like.

Ryan may not be the essential man for Speaker but one wonders what Conservative critics want. Who would they choose and why?  If no one is likely to win, would firebrands be OK with Speaker Boehner remaining in place?  This is why discerning what makes a good Speaker matters to understand what candidate to support and appreciating the consequences of the choice.

Representative Ryan tends to be a conservative but has some bagging regarding bailouts and lingering concerns about immigration.  If he becomes Speaker, he may not be out of the rubber chicken circuit as much fundraising. But Ryan will probably be more of a media friendly face of the House and can articulate the Republican message.  Ryan’s reluctance to leave the Ways and Means Committee is because he wanted to radically reform our tax code from the burdensome stack of bureaucratic regulations.  It remains to be seen if this reformist impetus can be instituted while in the Speaker’s chair.

The Republican House Caucus will vote in secret on October 28th. If Ryan is a clear winner, then a formal floor vote should follow on October 29th as Boehner steps down.  But if the votes are not they, all hell will break loose and the House will need to discern what makes for an acceptable choice for Speaker. When Gingrich resigned in 1998, Rep. Bob Livingston (R-LA 1st) was poised to be Head of the House, but some kinks came up in that ascension, which brought about Speaker Denny Hastert.

Nancy Pelosi on the Price of Bipartisanship

Devin Nunes on Vacating the Chair and Pelosi Republicans

As the Motion to Vacate the Chair stops being a theoretical idle threat and enters the realm of political possibility, some Speaker Boehner loyalists have begin to lash out.

Congressman Devin Nunes is the youngest Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He did not get this coveted position without the aid of leadership.  Thus, it explains his harsh words about the Freedom Caucus.

The trouble is that his explanation of the process is mistaken.  If Speaker Boehner has trouble securing enough votes to defeat the Motion to Vacate the Chair, Boehner and the Establishment Republicans either need to rely upon the graciousness of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 12th previously 8th) in getting some of her Democrat Caucus to support Boehner or vote Present, thus lowing the threshold for victory. 

There are indications that Pelosi might be willing to lend her support, but at what price?  Could the Republican Caucus countenance a Speaker who retains power only by relying upon support from the other aisle? If it is a down low deal, with some Democrats skipping the vote or voting Present, what concessions will have to be made.  Or is it just the pleasure of watching Boehner twist in the wind thus allowing more progressive power during the 114th Congress and beyond?

If Boehner loses re-election, there is no way that Nancy Pelosi or another Democrat garners the 218 votes necessary for ascending to the Speaker's seat.  So it is a misnomer to call the Freedom Caucus "Pelosi Republicans".

Lindsey Graham on Nancy Pelosi

  

 The House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 8th) claimed to have been "near tears" during Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu's Joint Address to Congress.   Wags wondered if such a scenario is possible, considering the 74 year old former Speaker's taut visage, presumably from numerous cosmetic surgeries. 

 Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), a long-shot Republican presidential hopeful, chose to go at a private fundraiser there in highlighting the top Democrat's haughty hijinks. Though Graham later apologized for his bon mot, he may never regain the Botox primary vote. Critics charge that Graham was unforgivable as being sexist for pointing out the plastic surgeries.  

Wonder if liberal critics feel any remorse when they make fat jokes at the expense of Chris Christie or mock Sarah Palin or Scott Walker's intellectual prowess without pointing to policy specifics.

Ralph Nader on "Three Strikes and You're Out"

Nancy Pelosi on Congressional Power

House Minority Leader Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 12th)  quipped that she could have thrown Karl Rove into the Capitol Hill calaboose. Pelosi was reacting to the contempt vote by Rep. Darrell Issa's House Government Reform Committee for US Attorney General Eric Holder for refusing to comply with Fast and Furious subpoenas. 

h/t: Michael Ramirez