2022 House and Senate election

Mr. Deez said:
At this point, I don't think dumping money into it makes the military stronger. We're getting less for a lot more. We have the usual corruption and waste that goes with government. However, we also have greatly diminished competition due to post-Cold War consolidation. That keeps procurement costs higher.
Click to expand...

This eerily sounds like the situation with Texas football to me.
 
Mr. Deez said:
The House adjourned without electing a Speaker. Link. Be prepared for Democrats to start offering to vote for a moderate Republican speaker candidate.
Click to expand...

If/when that happens it will become even more clear that the Republican Party is controlled opposition. And I would say not worth a vote from a conservative person.
 
Murphy'sBoy said:
Republican inability to govern on display for the world to see. The 20 "rebels" are like kamikaze pilots who took off from their carriers and then circled back and sunk them.
Click to expand...
This is actually a good analogy. The Republican party is garbage. I support this insurgency. Keep it going and make the swamp sweat. Force Dems to vote for McCarthy or for some other scenario. Im all for dissent in the face of capitulation to the establishment machine.
 
Murphy'sBoy said:
Republican inability to govern on display for the world to see. The 20 "rebels" are like kamikaze pilots who took off from their carriers and then circled back and sunk them.
Click to expand...

That's a stupid MSM narrative. This is what is called democracy. You didn't get that under Pelosi and the dems.
 
Garmel said:
That's a stupid MSM narrative. This is what is called democracy. You didn't get that under Pelosi and the dems.
Click to expand...

As far as the government goes, I'm a fan of generally speaking the longer it takes the better the result for Americans. When things whiz by in a fast vote look out for the **** to start slinging.
 
Murphy'sBoy said:
Republican inability to govern on display for the world to see. The 20 "rebels" are like kamikaze pilots who took off from their carriers and then circled back and sunk them.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it would be pretty hard for anyone to govern with a majority that small. Having said that, they do look stupid not having their **** together enough to elect a Speaker.
 
theiioftx said:
So we elect people who hire others to do their job? It all makes sense now when a 4000 page omnibus bill passes without the people’s representatives reading it. We are not a representative republic. We are ******.
Click to expand...

The idea of having staff goes back quite a long time, and you do need them. My first job was as an administrative aide to a state rep back when I was 20. I probably answered the phone 50x per day and drafted another 30 letters answering constituent mail each day, and when I wasn't doing that, I was helping constituents who were getting the runaround from state agencies. The more senior people researched and read legislation, and when I was off the clock, I stayed in the office and joined them to help and as a learning experience. I can't imagine the member doing all that himself and being on the floor to debate and vote. And a member of Congress has about 5 or 6 times as many constituents. Pretty much impossible.

theiioftx said:
And pay isn’t an issue for being in politics. All of them - Dems and Republicans- leave as multi millionaires after office. We are all fools for not being in politics.
Click to expand...

But that's a separate issue. They're not getting rich off the pay. They're mostly getting rich off of side deals that are enabled by sloppy ethics rules.
 
Monahorns said:
If/when that happens it will become even more clear that the Republican Party is controlled opposition. And I would say not worth a vote from a conservative person.
Click to expand...

Not sure what else they can do. You've got about 200 members who are willing to vote for their nominee, and you've got another 20 who would rather stir up **** and grandstand than get on with their work.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Not sure what else they can do. You've got about 200 members who are willing to vote for their nominee, and you've got another 20 who would rather stir up **** and grandstand than get on with their work.
Click to expand...

Wut? They're trying to keep another 2022 from happening.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Honestly, I haven't. What do they want?
Click to expand...

This all started slightly after the elections. Here's one that I didn't see mentioned in these articles- They want McCarthy to quit interfering in the primaries and he won't agree to that. In other words, they want him to quit going after MAGA. Deez, these are the good guys.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...out-speaker-demands-amid-mccarthy-opposition/

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...mands-insufficient-ahead-of-speaker-election/
 
Mr. Deez said:
The idea of having staff goes back quite a long time, and you do need them. My first job was as an administrative aide to a state rep back when I was 20. I probably answered the phone 50x per day and drafted another 30 letters answering constituent mail each day, and when I wasn't doing that, I was helping constituents who were getting the runaround from state agencies. The more senior people researched and read legislation, and when I was off the clock, I stayed in the office and joined them to help and as a learning experience. I can't imagine the member doing all that himself and being on the floor to debate and vote. And a member of Congress has about 5 or 6 times as many constituents. Pretty much impossible.



But that's a separate issue. They're not getting rich off the pay. They're mostly getting rich off of side deals that are enabled by sloppy ethics rules.
Click to expand...

I'm not against having staff, but it seems obvious the staff who are unelected are writing these massive bills that the elected representatives do not read. They just tell them to stick massive payoffs in for donors who then pad their pockets outside of the ethics rules.
 
theiioftx said:
I'm not against having staff, but it seems obvious the staff who are unelected are writing these massive bills that the elected representatives do not read. They just tell them to stick massive payoffs in for donors who then pad their pockets outside of the ethics rules.
Click to expand...

I'm going to disappoint you even more. The staff usually doesn't write the bills either. They're usually written by lawyers who work for the Legislative Counsel, and many of them aren't very good, which is why a lot of laws are poorly drafted. Think of them as the gay porn actors of the legal profession. And when they aren't writing the bills, lobbyists (or more accurately, the lobbyists' high-powered big firm lawyers) usually are.
 
Garmel said:
This all started slightly after the elections. Here's one that I didn't see mentioned in these articles- They want McCarthy to quit interfering in the primaries and he won't agree to that. In other words, they want him to quit going after MAGA. Deez, these are the good guys.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...out-speaker-demands-amid-mccarthy-opposition/

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...mands-insufficient-ahead-of-speaker-election/
Click to expand...

I'll bet he'd agree to some of this. The real fight is likely about the rules committee and requiring the leadership to stay out of primary elections. To meet their demands, he'd have to kick loyal members off the Rules Committee and defund them to appease people like Lauren Boebert who will screw him every chance she gets.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Deez said:
I'm going to disappoint you even more. The staff usually doesn't write the bills either. They're usually written by lawyers who work for the Legislative Counsel, and many of them aren't very good, which is why a lot of laws are poorly drafted. Think of them as the gay porn actors of the legal profession. And when they aren't writing the bills, lobbyists (or more accurately, the lobbyists' high-powered big firm lawyers) usually are.
Click to expand...
You never disappoint. I learn from HF posters everyday. :hookem:
 
Mr. Deez said:
Not sure what else they can do. You've got about 200 members who are willing to vote for their nominee, and you've got another 20 who would rather stir up **** and grandstand than get on with their work.
Click to expand...

Let me correct this:
"You've got about 200 members who are more Progressive than conservative, and you've got another 20 who would rather hold the line on a conservative agenda than play nice with the US regime."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top