- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- politics@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
This was hilarious to read. There’s nothing funnier than someone behaving unreasonably getting madder and madder, while the person they’re dealing with stays perfectly calm. Though I don’t doubt it’ll result in even pettier behaviour from the republicans.
Beautiful. This is the right idea.
Edit: This part made me actually lol after the build-up of the article:
Cotton got so mad he started talking about himself in the third person.
“Mr. Cotton says the chairman needs to rethink his decision,” said Cotton, as his name came up in the roll call. “That’s what Mr. Cotton says.”
…
Through all this, Durbin sat expressionless, waiting for breaks in the attacks to quietly direct the clerk to continue the roll call.“So Mr. Chairman, you’re saying because you think Sen. Grassley violated the rule, you’re going to violate the rule?” [Sen. John Kennedy] asked.
“It’s called precedent, senator,” replied Durbin.
Worst John Kennedy ever.
I’m glad to finally see this. I was dispointed in the past when the Dems almost controlled everything and still couldn’t get anything done.
Contrast that to a little control by the GOP and they could cause all kinds of chaos and get their agendas moving.
Part of me suspects it may be that way by design. Democrats will pay lip service to some left-leaning ideas, but when it comes time to pass legislation, they seem to just put their hands up like, “Well, that didn’t work, what’re we gonna do? I guess we shelve that idea.” I half-suspect that Democrats are there to safely funnel left-leaning social movements, to make sure that nothing really ever happens or that their ideas get sufficiently watered down or blocked altogether.
Meanwhile, Republicans have the most dogshit proposals that just sail through whenever they really want them to.
Yup. That’s part of the poison of the two party system. The Republicans are now just the fascist party and the Democrats are, for the most part, just “everything else,” which necessarily includes some conservative ideologies. I’m not a Democrat, but I’m registered as one because that’s the closest I can get to an actual party that I agree with that may have some impact.
I hope we can someday go back to “normal” Rs and Ds so that a third party option becomes viable instead of just a vote for the other guy. I yearn to be able to vote for someone, not just against someone.
I yearn to be able to vote for someone, not just against someone.
I see the primaries as the perfect place for me to vote for someone I’m passionate about. I also get to send a message to the party that I support a platform that looks different from the right-of-center candidates.
Remember to support systems/organizations working to make changes that allow for challengers from outside the main two parties to succeed. (Like ranked choice voting where not voting democratic doesn’t mean giving power to Republican or vice versa!)
You are correct. Neo-liberals are conservatives. When you vote, make sure to favor progressives over neo-liberals.
“half suspect” 😳
It’s funny what you can do when you want to accomplish something instead of standing in your own way.
Love to hear it, durbin
So that’s why I saw Marsha Blackburn go after Sotomayor.
Funny how Mitch Mconnel rushed to appoint ACB after RBG died even though it was an election year and only a couple months away from election.
Why wasn’t the GOP having a meltdown then? Weren’t they supposed to wait until after the election?
Even more haneous thing about that was RBG’s last dying wish was to please wait to replace her until after the election.
I really dgaf about these GOP tantrums. Suck it.
Republicans once again proving that they are just a bunch of whiney, hypocritical bitches.
Man, conservatives are just a bunch of little whiny bitches. Congratulations to Durbin for keeping a straight face as the little bitches lost their goddamned minds.
Let’s all hope the dems finally grow a spine. They suck almost as much as the gop but I’ll take slightly less bad over complete chaos and destruction of democracy.
Braindead comment. Dems suck nowhere near as bad as Republicans! Literally comparing adults to children.
What makes you think they’re even remotely comparable?
Us continuing to call the GOP dumb and children is giving them cover. They are (mostly) intelligent adults hellbent on destroying our culture and undoing decades of progress, mostly through legal means.
If we keep pretending they are not then it gives them more cover to bitch and moan when the Democrats do anything remotely similar to prevent or undo the damage, which is not NEARLY enough.
Right? These people are seditionists and traitors, calling them dumb children just provides them cover as they try to force their bastardized Christian hegemony on the rest of us.
The sad thing is you’re both right. The Democrats ARE the only adults in the room, but they’re still also self-serving asshats. Do not forget how friendly Dems are with big business. Do not forget how friendly Democrats are with the insurance industry. Do not forget how much they sit on their hands…
Democrats ARE adults… but they aren’t good adults. Yes, we need less children in the room before we can more easily suss out who the competent adults are.
But let’s not pretend every adult in the government is competent simply because Republicans enjoy shitting their pants.
Based on all the weird downvotes in this thread, it seems Lemmy might be losing its taste for subtlety.
You are absolutely right that most are a bunch of self-serving asshats. In my experience, the sign of a mature adult is someone who can admit when they’re wrong and do the right thing even when it’s less convenient than doing the wrong thing. Dems do the wrong thing a lot, and calling them out on it is one of the few ways we can force change. They also do the right thing way more often than the GOP. Dem’s corruption often seems less flagrant than the GOP’s because they couch it in neoliberal pro-business language. It’s still corruption, and the GOP is still way worse. Both things can be true.
Based on all the weird downvotes in this thread, it seems Lemmy might be losing its taste for subtlety.
Threads criticizing neoliberals always get a suspicious amount of downvotes relative to the amount of rebuttals. It’s almost as if the people doing it hate your criticism, but can’t articulate any reason you’re wrong.
Nah, folks that are center-left are tired of the same out-group/in-group games. Not far enough left? Then one is practically in bed with fascists. It is tiresome, and plenty of folks are weary of laying out the difference in lieu of having meaningful discussions.
Threads criticizing neoliberals always get a suspicious amount of downvotes relative to the amount of rebuttals.
Even your own comment has the whiff of conspiracy where it need not be.
Yea… It’s really sad when people turn it in to team sports. One side being really bad does not magically make the other “team” the good guys… They’re both fucking awful representative parties unless you make a healthy six figures or more, which of course is a small minority of the populous they’re supposed to represent…
Then people come in here and act like Biden is Jesus for making a union deal right after crushing a union strike… Smacks so much of everyone sucking Obama off for the ACA when it’s LITERALLY a Republican plan from the 90s.
People need to remember who the Democrats actually are. There’s a reason they have a tepid response to the rise of fascism.
No one is calling the Democrats perfect or suggesting they couldn’t be better. But they are demonstrably better than the GOP, even if that’s a low bar. They consistently pass legislation and enact policies to the benefit of the whole nation, not just the donor class.
When the complaint is that they’re not good enough, they’re being blamed for not catering exclusively to the progressive base the way Republicans cater to theirs. Which refutes the notion that “both sides are the same” on its own.
Yes, we should hold their feet to the fire and convince them to do better. But we should do it without boosting Republican talking points like “both sides.” Better to say “they’re good, but they could be better.”
Precisely. Republicans refuse to govern and so those in the middle and on the left are challenged with moving the country forward while preserving the very institutions that “conservatives” once held sacrosanct and are now railing to dismantle.
Better blame the Dems for not snapping the political order into something completely different by fiat.
Republicans refuse to govern and so those in the middle and on the left are challenged with moving the country forward
And those in the center keep stopping those on the left from doing so.
Mostly due to the current world kerfufles… but I agree in principal. I’m not fond of nearly any dems in leadership but I want them in power so that we can focus efforts on fixing the party rather than an existential crisis to democracy.
It was meant somewhat tongue in cheek, I realize the parties are miles apart. However, if the entire republican party disappeared, we’d still have a shitshow of a government.
…but one that wouldn’t base their entire platform on being the fourth Reich.
Swimming in shit is still better than bobbing for french fries.…but one that wouldn’t base their entire platform on being the fourth Reich.
It helps very little when the opposition to such a group bases their entire strategy on being Neville Chamberlain.
As a descendant of Winnie Churchill, I agree.
Right, which is why I said I’d prefer them… You’re proving my point, swimming in shit is nearly as bad as bobbing for fries in it. Personally if I’m submerged in shit, I’m not that concerned with getting some in my mouth, I need the fuck out of the shit.
I wasn’t arguing. I was agreeing.
I’m an Independent that votes Dem. I wanted Bernie, but settled for Biden, because Trump.
Hoisting the GOP on their own petards doesn’t offend me one whit.
No worries man, sorry if my reply was mean, we’re all in this shitpool together.
No worries at all, man.
I see his point for doing it but it really seems like there should be a better remedy for someone breaking the House rules than waiting until you’re in the majority and doing it back to them.
A better remedy would be for both parties to follow the rules. If Republicans refuse, Democrats shouldn’t be hamstrung by following those same rules.
Sucks to suck, GOP.
Like I said I get the argument but presumably Democrats were mad originally because they thought it was bad process to break the rules like that right?
Imagine Republicans pass a law that says Republicans don’t have to pay taxes. When Democrats come to power they shouldn’t just pass a law saying Democrats don’t have to pay taxes, they should undo the Republican plan and make Republicans repay the taxes they didn’t pay. Meaning, they put into place a structure that undoes and disincentivizes the bad action rather than just also taking part in the bad action.
Because the Republican ploy is to destroy norms and make it all about power politics, so “haha I’m doing it back you are so owned!” actually plays into their hands. You’re legitimizing the rule breaking they did, proving that it’s OK to do in the future too.
If they break the rules, they get this criticism. If they don’t break the rules, they get accused of being spineless and unwilling to fight. They really have no way to win, do they?
I mean, if they’ll be criticized either way, the course of action that accomplishes something seems preferable.
I agree. But I don’t see the “damned if you do and damned if you don’t” attitudes toward them helping the goal of fending off fascism.
Accomplishments give us something to run on.
Nobody votes based on judiciary committee rules, so I don’t think criticism really matters. It’s more about protecting the institution of the rules and you can’t do that by breaking them.
The rules have already been broken when it suits Republicans. Reciprocity continues to be fair play.
“The two preceding chairs of this committee violated the letter and spirit of Committee Rule IV,” he said, referring to a committee rule that requires at least one member of the minority to vote with the majority to end debate on a matter before moving to vote on it.
Durbin said one former chair, Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), violated this rule with a vote on Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination, and Graham was chair when he broke the rule to advance a partisan immigration bill without Democratic input.
“In doing so, Republicans established a new precedent that I followed on one occasion last Congress and will follow again today,” said the Illinois Democrat. “I’ve said time and again there cannot be one set of rules for Republicans and a different set for Democrats.”
The best remedy is a consistent set of rules, but once a precedent is established, that’s basically the new rule until proven otherwise.
