Skip to content

Digby's Hullabaloo Posts

Could the Problem Solvers actually solve a problem?

Here’s the latest on maneuverings to out-maneuver the MAGA crazies:

The long-shot idea that Democrats could bail out the beleaguered Speaker Kevin McCarthy is suddenly getting real.

Small groups of centrist Democrats are holding secret talks with several of McCarthy’s close GOP allies about a last-ditch deal to fund the government, according to more than a half-dozen people familiar with the discussions. The McCarthy allies engaging in those conversations are doing so out of serious concern that their party can’t stop an impending shutdown on its own, given the intransigence of a handful of conservatives.

Lawmakers involved in the talks — who mostly belong to the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, the Republican Governance Group or the centrist New Democrat Coalition — have labored to keep their work quiet. Many Republicans involved are incredibly worried about revealing their backup plan, wanting to wait until every other tool in McCarthy’s arsenal has failed.

That moment may not be until next week, just ahead of the Sept. 30 shutdown deadline.

“It’s got to be bipartisan anyway, at some point,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) said of a solution to the shutdown crisis. Referring to the conservative holdouts, he added: “So why negotiate with these five or 10 people who move the goalposts?”

Generally, the bipartisan group is focusing on two major ideas: a procedural maneuver to force a vote on a compromise spending plan — or somehow crafting a bill so popular that McCarthy can pass it and survive any challenge from the right. That bill would likely be a bipartisan short-term patch with some disaster money, Ukraine aid and small-scale border policies, according to multiple people briefed on the talks who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The Problem Solvers began showing their framework to members Wednesday, with plans to formally vote on endorsing it by the evening, according to two people familiar with the plans who were granted anonymity to discuss them. Another group, which included top aides for both the New Democrat Coalition and Republican Governance Group, met earlier Wednesday to discuss their own stopgap funding plan, according to three other aides familiar with the situation.

While the talks were borne out of the spending crisis, they have by necessity had to address another glaring problem for the speaker: Whether Democrats are also willing to protect his gavel from a vote to strip it if he ultimately does seek support across the aisle.

Privately, many Democrats say they’re willing to help the Californian with both problems, though they’ll demand concessions — and they’ll need their leader, Hakeem Jeffries, to be on board.

To be clear, any plan devised by these rank-and-file members would face serious hurdles before it got to any possible vote. But the bipartisan McCarthy-bailout conversations have only gained traction as his antagonists keep derailing his other option — a GOP-only spending patch that’s packed with conservative border policies and funding cuts.

Even if the speaker can resuscitate that proposal, Republicans have long known it wouldn’t pass the Senate. Eventually, they’d need to work with Democrats.

Exactly what Democrats could or would demand for their cooperation is unclear. The ultimate decision, they say, will rest with Jeffries, who’s stayed mum about how he’d handle a possible bipartisan compromise. Any questions Jeffries gets about the possibility of a GOP bid to toss the speaker, he bats aside as hypothetical.

(Asked about the possibility by POLITICO on Tuesday, Jeffries said: “House Democrats are focused on making life better for everyday Americans — solving problems on their behalf. House Republicans are focused on fighting each other.”)

Jeffries did huddle privately midday Wednesday with one of the groups involved in the cross-aisle talks: the roughly 60-member Problem Solvers Caucus.

Inside the room, Jeffries signaled he’d be willing to look at the centrist bloc’s various ideas for a solution — including a procedural gambit to pass a stopgap bill if it came to that, according to four people familiar with the situation. He said any short-term plan would need to reflect the bipartisan budget deal reached this spring.

“You’ll be part of the solution, and I’ve been supportive of your efforts in the past,” Jeffries told the group, according to two people familiar with his remarks.

McCarthy’s broken rules of thumb

One day earlier, the Problem Solvers’ two leaders — Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) — were seen entering the office of the House parliamentarian alongside Bacon, a stalwart McCarthy ally.

Those members declined to say what they discussed regarding House rules. But behind the scenes, several options are on the table — including the unlikely choice to pursue a procedural move known as a discharge petition that would force a bill to the floor. (That avenue comes with a strict 30-day timeframe, so it has little chance of preventing a shutdown that’s just 11 days away.)

Bacon later recalled telling a group of roughly 30 Republicans, including members of leadership, during a closed-door meeting this week that he was “done” with GOP-only negotiations, arguing that the handful of holdouts in his party can’t be satisfied.

In a brief interview, McCarthy acknowledged the quiet efforts by centrists in both parties to team up on a spending solution. But he specifically dismissed the idea that any of his Republicans would back a discharge petition that needs a majority of the House to advance.

McCarthy said that his “rule of thumb” while in power has three components: Don’t oppose a rule to debate your party’s bill; support “whoever comes out of the conference for speaker” and do not sign onto a discharge petition.

Several Republicans have broken the first two items on his list, McCarthy added, “and so it has disrupted the entire conference. And people think they can do other things.”

‘If you are a nihilist’

Despite the low likelihood of a discharge petition to fund the government, it is still coming up in closed-door meetings as vulnerable Republicans make it particularly clear that they’re starting to lose patience with the conservative blockade.

Rep. Dan Bishop (R-N.C.), who has been involved in the GOP negotiations, alluded to the New York delegation as being “very candid” during internal talks that if Republicans can’t work out a short-term funding deal, “we’re going to sign a discharge petition.”

Two people familiar with those conversations pointed to New York Rep. Mike Lawler, who sits in one of the GOP’s toughest battleground seats, as especially vocal in private meetings about threats to sign a discharge petition.

Asked if he sees an increasing chance of centrists from both parties teaming up as the stalemate continues, Lawler said that “I would like to see the House Republican majority govern” by passing a short-term patch that can start further talks with the Senate.

“But until that happens,” he added, “we need to keep the government funded and operational. And my only comment to my colleagues is: If we want to govern, we need to do so expeditiously.”

The pushback from McCarthy on a possible discharge petition comes after he repeatedly failed to get his own members behind a GOP-only bill that would pair a stopgap funding patch with spending cuts and a Republican border bill. One Republican lawmaker involved in the talks acknowledged that the bipartisan maneuvering could help pressure conservatives to stop resisting any solution.

On the other hand, this lawmaker added, “If you are a nihilist and you want to burn the place down, you don’t care.”

But there are also risks for the Republicans involved in the bipartisan talks. Some conservative colleagues are already warning of political backlash from base voters, given that the very Democrats they are working with want to defeat them next year.

“I don’t relish the prospect that liberal members of the Republican caucus would decide to govern as Democrats with Democrats,” said Bishop, a McCarthy critic who helped sink a defense spending bill this week.

The biggest risk of all in the current cross-aisle conversations, though, is to McCarthy himself.

Helping advance a bipartisan deal would put him past a red line that his most vocal opponents have said could result in a vote to strip his gavel. Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) is on record vowing to force that vote if McCarthy brings a “clean” funding bill to the floor.

Bacon urged the speaker to stand firm: “We should ignore it. You can’t kowtow to that.”

What a tangled web they weave. It makes sense to try to cut out Gaetz and his cronies because they just want to blow the place up which the majority of the GOP thinks might not be a great way to get re-elected. But if Democrats bail out McCarthy is there any way he could possibly lead the caucus? I keep saying that he’s the only game in town, which is true, but how can he function under these conditions? Of course, he really isn’t functioning now, is he?

Hopefully whatever deal they come up with mirrors the deal that was already hashed out last spring for the debt ceiling or the Democrats are going to have their own challenges. The centrist “problem solvers” may have their own agenda. If it’s that “bipartisan short-term patch with some disaster money, Ukraine aid and small-scale border policies” I doubt there will be a ton of objections.

Stay tuned. None of this may add up to much. There are so many moving parts that it’s hard to see how it might come together. If it does the repercussions are going to be something to behold. Imagine what Trump will say!

Chairman emeritus Murdoch wishes Trump dead

Sic transit gloria mundi

Rupert Murdoch, founder of Fox Corp. and News Corp. (2015). Photo by Hudson Institute via Flickr (CC BY 2.0).

The Guardian on Wednesday:

Rupert Murdoch loathes Donald Trump so much that the billionaire has not just soured on him as a presidential candidate but often wishes for his death, the author Michael Wolff writes in his eagerly awaited new book on the media mogul, The Fall: The End of Fox News and the Murdoch Dynasty.

According to Wolff, Murdoch, 92, has become “a frothing-at-the-mouth” enemy of the 77-year-old former US president, often voicing thoughts including “This would all be solved if … ” and “How could he still be alive, how could he?”

CNBC Thursday (today):

Rupert Murdoch is stepping down as chairman of the board of both Fox Corp. and News Corp., the company said on Thursday.

The move will be official in November. Murdoch, 92, will be appointed chairman emeritus of each company. Lachlan Murdoch, one of his sons, will become sole chairman of News Corp and will continue as Fox Corp.’s executive chair and CEO.

“Our companies are in robust health, as am I,” the elder Murdoch said in a note to employees. “We have every reason to be optimistic about the coming years – I certainly am, and plan to be here to participate in them. But the battle for the freedom of speech and, ultimately, the freedom of thought, has never been more intense.”

Thus passeth the father of the greatest propaganda network the world has ever known, dedicated in retirement, as in life, to freedom of thought.

The only polls that matter

Remember the “red tsunami”?

If you’re like me, you don’t answer the phone if you don’t recognize the number or, lately, the spoofed names. Which begs the question: Who does? People willing to speak with pollsters, I’d wager. Pollsters themselves will explain how they control for this bias, to be sure, but polling itself seems more and more a sucker’s game. Remember predictions last fall of a “red tsunami”?

Chris Hayes made that point on Wednesday that the only polls that really matter are the ones voters participate in when they vote.

What special elections around the country tell us is that the GOP is in a hole. And they’re still digging.

What people tell themselves, telephone polls, or guys with microphones are a crude measure of the kind of country most Americans really want to live in.

Heather Cox Richardson dishes on a new program just launched by that “unpopular” Biden administration:

The fight over how we conceive of our federal government was on full display today.

The Biden administration announced the creation of the American Climate Corps. This will be a group of more than 20,000 young Americans who will learn to work in clean energy, conservation, and climate resilience while also earning good wages and addressing climate change. 

This ACC looks a great deal like the Civilian Conservation Corps established by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the Democrats in 1933, during the New Deal. The CCC was designed to provide jobs for unemployed young men (prompting critics to ask, “Where’s the She, She, She?”) while they worked to build fire towers, bridges, and foot trails, plant trees to stop soil erosion, stock fish, dig ditches, build dams, and so on. 

While the CCC was segregated, the ACC will prioritize hiring within communities traditionally left behind, as well as addressing the needs of those communities that have borne the brunt of climate change. If the administration’s rules for it become finalized, the corps will also create a streamlined pathway into federal service for those who participated in the program. 

In January, a poll showed that a climate corps is popular. Data for Progress found that voters supported such a corps by a margin of 39 points. Voters under 45 supported it by a margin of 51 points. 

While the Biden administration is establishing a modern version of a popular New Deal program, extremists in the Republican Party are shutting down the government to try to stop it from precisely this sort of action. They want to roll the government back to the days before the New Deal, ending government regulation, provision of a basic social safety net, investment in infrastructure, and protection of civil rights.

Republican leaders and their billionaire backers loathe the New Deal. They loathe the middle class America it created. They loathe their supporters for taking it for granted (like Medicare Veteran above) even while decrying it as socialism. Take it away and you’ll pay. Republicans know that too. At least those not fully embracing burning it all down.

Breathe

All is not lost:

The Republican Party’s increasing Trump-era tendency toward more extreme nominees and its struggles to account for the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade have already cost it plenty. It’s quite possible that these things cost it control of the Senate in both the 2020 and 2022 elections.

If unpopular GOP nominees in key states had merely matched the political fundamentals, Republicans might have held the Senate for the duration of Joe Biden’s presidency and had a much more significant House majority with which to work today.

Now, these same things may have cost Republicans control of a state.

New Hampshire on Tuesday became the latest state in which Democrats over-performed in a special election — a trend that has held very steady ever since Roe was overturned last summer.

Democrat Hal Rafter won by 12 points in a state House district that went narrowly for Donald Trump in 2020. The 12-point improvement on the 2020 margin is in line with Democrats’ encouraging continued over-performances in special elections this year; Daily Kos Elections and FiveThirtyEight data on more than two dozen special elections show the party running an average of 7.6 points better than their 2020 margins — margins from a 2020 election that, it bears noting, were already good for Democrats — and double digits better than the normal partisan fundamentals.

Even moderate Republicans are losing because they can’t afford to alienate the cultists in their districts. If you think that people are going to vote for Trump himself or not show up just because Biden is old I think there’s ample evidence of that not being true. Democrats are showing up in big numbers in these off year elections. They will show up for the presidential as well. People may not be happy with their choices but they seem to understand the stakes.

Update: Chris Hayes had a great segment on this subject:

Both sides, both sides

MSNBC framing of today’s hearing:

Attorney General Merrick Garland appeared before the House judiciary Committee for the first time since Donald Trump and Hunter Biden’s separate indictments and it went about how you would expect it to go. House Republicans accused AG Garland of politicizing the Department of Justice to protect President Biden. Democrats accused Republicans of politicizing Judicial Oversight to benefit Donald Trump and AG Garland, well, he just tried to defend himself.

Oh those crazy Republicans and Democrats. They’re all full of shit, amirite? Just playing politics. Waddaya gonna do?

This is the problem, folks. It’s not “both sides.” It’s Republicans. It’s not hard to make a judgment about this. It’s called reality.

Gun chicks

Lauren Boebert with friends in front of her now-closed restaurant

Claire Potter talks about the Lauren Boebert “situation” in her newsletter today making the point that while it’s not nice to slut-shame women, it’s something that Boebert and her erstwhile buddy Marjorie Taylor Greene actually embrace as a big part of their MAGA image:

… I do not feel inclined to lecture other people who slut-shame Lauren Boebert. I think it is misguided, and it isn’t because of the unproven allegations that she actually worked as an escort on a sugar-daddy website. It’s because she has spent a lot of time and energy polishing her reputation as a Gun Chick, a popular erotic figure on the right who we might tentatively define as “the slutty girl next door—with a gun.”

It’s not an accident that Boebert looks and acts slutty; it’s calculated. It is something you are supposed to notice, and it is supposed to cause Republican dicks to lead the male voters they are attached to into the voting booth on election day. I seriously doubt that Lauren Boebert would be in the House of Representatives at all if many voters in Colorado’s Third didn’t love it that she looks and acts like such a slut with a gun.

Boebert voters, and to a lesser extent, admirers of another congressional Gun Chick, Marjorie Taylor Greene (R, GA-14), do not care that they are not serious people. They do not care that these women are paid to legislate and have never actually done it. Instead, Boebert and Greene’s brand of out-there, raunchy female sexuality is central to their appeal in a right-wing party that spends much of its time not taking women seriously as human beings and trying to suppress everyone else’s sexuality and gender expression. Being dignified is “establishment,” but being slutty “makes the libs melt down.” Perhaps most importantly, it means that these women may be in authority, but they don’t have to be taken seriously because it’s all just a joke. Really, they don’t want to be in government; they just want to fuck, have fun, and shoot guns with men.

Once seen as a matched pair, Boebert and Greene shot into the spotlight in 2020 as full-fledged Christian nationalist MAGA partisans even as Trump, the guy who made them electable, was being shown the door. While Boebert periodically flew in the QAnon slipstream, Greene was a wholly convinced follower, something she renounced on the floor of the House in February 2021 after she had been kicked off all her committees for spouting weird, antisemitic conspiracies at the drop of a hat. And although they touted their “family values,” both women’s marriages quickly died after they came to Congress. Perry Greene filed for divorce in 2022, a decade after Greene reportedly had several affairs and briefly tried to ditch him. The 36-year-old Boebert dumped her husband Jayson, whom she married at sixteen. Perhaps he still loves her:  he took responsibility for her disgrace at the Beetlejuice performance by admitting that he has treated her badly.

Despite their similarities, Greene and Boebert have since broken up with each other. On opposite sides of the Kevin McCarthy speaker fight, they had a final falling out in June when Boebert plagiarized MTG’s impeachment bill, and Greene called her a “little bitch” on the House floor. And yet, as Gun Chicks, the two women still call our attention to the centrality of slutty, trashy behavior to MAGA world.

Boebert owes both her business and political careers to exploiting the nexus of guns and sex that the Gun Chick represents. She and Jayson owned a restaurant in Rifle, Colorado, called Shooter’s Grill (note: the name rips off the “Hooters” brand), where waitresses dressed in revealing clothing also wore pistols on their hips. Boebert first came to public attention when she confronted then-presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke in Aurora over his plan to institute federal gun control, mostly through a buy-back program. Before running for office, Boebert became a local pro-gun organizer and also publicly associated with several militia group chapters (which are full of Gun Chicks) in Colorado.Subscribe

Greene, too, campaigned as a Gun Chick in 2020: among other things, she posted a video of herself brandishing a semi-automatic long gun and warning “Antifa” to “stay out of northwest Georgia.” Although Facebook pulled it down, it got over 2 million views there and another 1 million on Twitter. She also shared a second controversial image of herself with a weapon on Facebook; in the background were progressive women of color in Congress, and in the foreground, the phrase: “The Squad’s Worst Nightmare.”

The Gun Chick is always white. She meets right-wing men where they are, politically and sexually, and is, by definition, an erotic figure who captures both the allure of female beauty and the thrill of barely contained violence. She is one of many contradictory figures (for example, the large number of closeted gay men) in an extremist movement shot through with Christian Nationalism.

In Congress, Boebert and Greene represent this much larger phenomenon, draw strength from it, and style themselves in ways that other Gun Chicks and their admirers recognize. Gun Chicks wear clothes that emphasize their cleavage and large breasts, bare their arms, sport visible tattoos, are verbally aggressive (particularly with other women), and carry a weapon whenever and wherever they can. 

Christian nationalism and unrestrained sexuality merge in the Gun Chick. Being a Gun Chick can be part of, or your entire, professional and social identity. For example, former porn star and stripper Alaina Hicks (a.k.a. Bonnie Rotten), who has gotten out of the business, has re-branded herself as a Second Amendment advocate and someone who has a lot of remorse for her life in porn. Now, as a Gun Chick, she’s a kind of firearms influencer who gets to wear more clothes than she formerly did when she does photo shoots. But those images never fail to draw attention to her impressive physical assets, which are accented by draping weapons over and around them. 

Gun Chicks are barely restrained by clothes that are intentionally slutty: they are skin tight, falling off, and otherwise revealing of boobs, butts, and pubes. You can see this in the popular Girls With Guns calendar: here are shots from the 2020 edition, which not only feature breasts popping out of bikini tops and tac vests but incorporate porn tropes. Take a look at February’s lesbian twin scene, Miss March in full leather, or Miss April in black lingerie, fuck me shoes, and an ammunition clip directed towards the space between her legs. Then, there is Miss October, who is bruised, has a split lip, and looks to be waiting for her abuser to come home so she can take him out with what looks to be a small shotgun. And this is a site with high production values. You can visit a cheaper, sadder version of Gun Chick World on the subreddit r/hotchickswithguns.

In other words, Gun Chicks are, by definition, slutty. You can slut-shame them if you like, but it only makes them stronger—which is why it is stupid to get involved with defending someone like Lauren Boebert from slut-shaming. It would be like trying to humiliate Jim Jordan for acting like a rabid animal all the time or criticizing Ted Cruz for acting like a stupid person. It’s part of the package and part of the brand.

So, my fellow feminists, if you wish to go high in this case, be my guest. But you aren’t fighting a battle that Lauren Boebert is interested in. Boebert’s sluttiness is intentional, and it’s something she works hard at. And she knows that what she did in that Denver theater will only make the people who voted for her love her more

Potter is absolutely right. This is who Boebert is. Sure, she and Greene call themselves “Christians” and have a bunch of kids proving how devoted they are to traditional family values. But they are something else and “gun chick” is the best description I’ve seen.

“Fallacious”

The questioning of Merrick Garland before the House Judiciary Committee is enough to make you give up on democracy if this is what we have as leaders

Kevin’s conundrum

It seems like only yesterday that we were on the cusp of defaulting on the debt and many of us were predicting that the kamikaze Freedom Caucus was going to make it happen. They sure sounded serious. Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy was unable to keep that extremist right flank under control and they were threatening to unseat him under the rule they insisted he adopt in order to get the votes he needed to attain office if he didn’t meet their demands. With a four vote margin he had almost no room to maneuver. After the interminable 15 rounds of voting and all the backroom deals he had to make to get the gavel back in January the prospects for a deal looked very slim.

Yet, with all that working against them, McCarthy and President Biden surprised everyone by managing to pound out an agreement that could get the required number of votes in both Houses. A number of House Republicans were livid, especially the Freedom Caucus, and refused to vote for it but Democrats filled in the gaps and the catastrophe was averted at the last minute.

There was a lot of grumbling but no one took any action to unseat McCarthy. instead the House Republicans picked up they left off with their performative investigations. But some of them aren’t stupid and they knew they would soon get another chance to force their will on the country. While the debt ceiling deal ostensibly “capped” all spending at 2023 levels for two years, nobody said that appropriations bills which had to be finished by September 30th couldn’t be cut to the bone.

And so, here we are less than two weeks before the deadline, no appropriations bills have been passed and the House GOP is at each throats. They may not even be able to agree on a continuing resolution to extend the deadline so they can keep the government open beyond week after next. If Kevin McCarthy can’t pull something out of his hat again, and it really doesn’t seem likely, we are almost certainly headed for another shut down.

Last week McCarthy authorized an impeachment inquiry for Joe Biden without bringing it to a vote as he had earlier vowed to do. This was widely seen as a sop to the MAGA extremists who were shrieking “Impeach!” at the top of their lungs every five minutes despite the fact that there is no evidence to support such an action. It didn’t work. Not only were they unsatisfied, they believe impeachment isn’t nearly good enough.

Last week the simmering feud between Matt Gaetz, R-Fl., and McCarthy finally boiled over when Gaetz openly threatened to take the necessary steps to remove the speaker if he didn’t agree to all of his demands. McCarthy finally lost his temper and responded, “If you want to file a motion to vacate, then file the fucking motion.” Shortly afterwards, McCarthy had to forego plans to have the House vote on a defense spending bill because he couldn’t get the votes and Gaetz fired back,“how about just move the fucking spending bills?” he told CNN.

So that went well. And so far this week, it’s going even better. Now the Freedom Caucus itself is at each other’s throats. On Tuesday, five hardcore MAGA Republicans stopped that proposed defense spending bill from even coming up for debate, once again paralyzing the the House making it impossible to move forward. This maneuver is very unusual and appears to be a tactic designed solely to embarrass Kevin McCarthy.

When asked about it McCarthy was clearly rattled:

Ask those five why they voted against it.  Think about what they’re voting against. They’re voting against even bringing the bill up to have a discussion about it to vote on. If you’re opposed to the bill, vote against the bill at the end…You could change it if you don’t like it. But the idea that you vote against a rule, to even bring it up, that makes no sense to me,”

Mike Garcia, R-Ca., was also fit to be tied and called out his fellow Republicans. He said, “out of fear, they decided to vote against the rule to even allow this to come to the floor for debate, This city, Washington DC, is riddled with Chinese sympathizers.” You read that right. He said those five Republicans were Chinese sympathizers.

Things went downhill from there. Over the weekend, the Freedom Caucus and the leadership negotiated a stop-gap Continuing Resolution to take them through October 31st and avoid an imminent shutdown. It was a ridiculous agreement that no Democrats would sign on to but they thought they could bring together the GOP caucus to at least buy some more time. But no. When it came time to vote on Tuesday, the whole thing unraveled and 16 Republicans balked. McCarthy had to withdraw that one from the floor as well.

The recriminations were swift and nasty. The Daily Beast reported:

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), who opposed the bill’s continued funding of the office of Trump prosecutor Jack Smith, took potshots online at one of the bill’s sponsors, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL), who shot back, “You’ll need more than tweets and hot takes!!” Meanwhile, The Hill reported that Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-IN) blamed “weak Speaker” McCarthy, who hit back by calling Spartz a quitter for deciding to retire at the end of her term to spend more time with her family. 

\

More or less sane Congressman Mike Lawlor, R-N.Y., told CNN, “this is not conservative Republicanism, this is stupidity, these people can’t define a win, they don’t know how to take yes for an answer. It’s a clown show.” That is 100% correct.

And it’s not going to get any better.


I have no predictions as to where this is going to end up. A government shutdown seems to be inevitable, but we just don’t know when it’s going to happen. It’s possible they’ll get some kind of extension through with Democrats’ help if they can do it without any conditions. But Gaetz and his cronies don’t seem to be in the mood for that sort of thing and they are obviously eager to call for a vote of no-confidence in McCarthy.

The big question remains, however, and it may be McCarthy’s trump card in the end. As I’ve said before, who else could get enough votes if McCarthy is forced out? More importantly, what kind of masochist would want to? No, I think he’s probably safe. The country, however, couldn’t be in worse hands than those of this insane GOP House majority.

Late yesterday we had this strange report:

That it was found on a baby changing table in a bathroom is just too perfect.

Salon

Defending democracy

More strange bedfellows

MSNBC’s “Deadline White House” on Tuesday featured a long segment with members of Operation Saving Democracy. Led by Lt. Col. Amy McGrath (USMC, ret.), the group boasts “almost 600 retired Generals, Admirals, Ambassadors, cabinet and service secretaries, appointed leaders, elected officials, and Senior Executive Service leaders have come together at this time of significant threat to the essential tenets of our Democratic institutions and values.” Joining McGrath were Adm. Steve Abbot (USN, ret.) and Rear Adm. Michael Smith (USN, ret.)

The group believes “The extreme far-right authoritarian ideology that has taken hold in the GOP is an attack on democracy itself.” They hope their credentials and numbers will make an impression on the Trump cult, or else help mobilize ordinary Americans against the domestic terror threat Trumpism poses.

“Donald Trump is an existential threat to democracy,” Abbot states into the camera.

“Donald Trump” is a collective noun here, shorthand for a deeper problem.

What were we just saying about strange bedfellows?

Here’s another bipartisan group (albeit less illustrious) out to save the country from that existential threat. Led by former Biden speechwriter, Mathew Littman, and including former Georgia Democratic congressional candidate Marcus Flowers, former Republican congressman Joe Walsh, and former Trump press secretary Stephanie Grisham, Mission: Democracy is more blunt about calling fascism fascism:

Our mission is to educate all Americans about the dangers posed by MAGA fascism and to encourage them to use our democratic process to help diminish the MAGA influence in our government.

Their ad is more over the top, beginning with a staged book burning:

Despite viral video of two Missouri Republican state senators with flamethrowers setting fire to “books” to chants of “Let’s go, Brandon,” Snopes reports that what the pair claim to have incinerated with their flamethrowers was “pile of empty boxes meant to represent what they described to as ‘woke,’ ‘liberal,’ or ‘leftist’ policies.”

Sure, and the mock gallows erected in front the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 and crowd chants of “Hang Mike Pence!” were metaphorical too, like the dead and wounded that day. This is where Ann Coulter once tossed her hair, rolled her eyes, and sighed, “It was just a joke.”

Coulter recently called Trump a “gigantic p—y” after he referred to the conservative commentator as a “has-been” and a “stone cold loser.”

Actually, the appearance of all these strange bedfellows gives me more hope than I’ve had the last few weeks.

As for the flamethrower duo, someone on formerly Twitter captioned their pyro performance video, “Peaked in high school.”

Start playing offense

Stay on message

How they do it,” Digby’s post and comments on “Tough Love For the Democrats” from Rick Wilson’s substack, blew up my Mastodon feed last night. Quite a fewf people agree it’s time for Democrats to stop farting around and treat the fight with MAGA as what it is: a fight.

Wilson shares the GOP’s two rules:

Rule 1: Just win, baby.

Rule 2: Stay on message.

Chuck your “almost religious belief that policy wins elections,” Wilson advises. Quit trying to win on fact-checking. This is a bare-knuckles brawl. Wilson credits Joe Biden for declaring MAGA Republicans a threat in 2022, that what was at stake is democracy and liberty. It still is. Next year’s elections are about “whether the American government is a tool for opportunity or one of oppression.”

“Get on and stay on this message, Democrats,” Wilson insists. Biden has gotten results. The former Republican consultant names Biden “arguably the most successful Democratic President since FDR, taken in total.”

A friend with Clinton White House experience concurs. Clinton came into office with an ambitious agenda and large margins in the House and Senate. In his first two years, Clinton “got one big budget bill through, and a NAFTA bill the Republicans and Big Business liked a lot more than working people and Democrats.” (That’s for sure.) But then things went to hell.

Obama had a decent first two years as well, Mike Lux continues:

When a youthful Barack Obama swept into power with huge margins in both houses of Congress, he had an ambitious agenda as well. Obama did get the Affordable Care Act passed (which was indeed “a big effing deal”) and the Dodd-Frank bill tightened up some Wall Street regulations in the aftermath of the 2008 financial collapse, but everything else on his agenda fell by the wayside as Republicans crushed Democrats in the 2010 election, controlling Congress for the rest of Obama’s presidency.

Joe Biden entered the White House with big ambitions, too. The moment he entered was even more perilous than the financial crisis Obama faced. Like Obama and Clinton, he had a trifecta, but his Congress was the most closely divided in modern history — a 50/50 Senate with Vice-President Harris breaking the tie, and a four seat margin in the House.

But because of his age and experience, Joe Biden had far more success in getting things done than any president in modern history. After two years in office, President Biden’s legislative and executive action track record engendered a debate among historians: was it the most sweeping and transformative administration in 60 years or in 90?

Let’s check the box scores:

Joe Biden and the Democratic trifecta got more than 80% of Americans immunized from COVID despite the worst public health disinformation campaign ever. They revived our economy from the depths of the COVID recession faster than any other major country, got Americans much needed money to keep them going in the hardest times, and saved state and local governments from having to make massive cuts in police, fire, and desperately needed public services. They delivered the first gun safety bill in over 30 years. They delivered the biggest infrastructure bill since the interstate highway system was built in the 1950s. They revitalized American manufacturing with Buy in America policies, the CHIPs Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act. They passed legislation to force Big Pharma to negotiate on drug prices and bring the cost of insulin down right away. They made the biggest investment any country has ever made in clean energy.

The four trillion dollars in investments in the American economy and American people will transform the economy for generations to come.

Pundits who take the “Biden’s too old” bait deserve ridicule, Wilson believes. “Trump is just as old, much less fit, and a proven threat to the nation’s future. Start playing offense on this message, Democrats.”

And Lux? “In terms of the great things he got done, [Biden] kicked the ass of every other president in modern times.”

Saving democracy from autocratic movements has in other times and in other countries required strange-bedfellow coalitions, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt write in “Tyranny of the Minority.” Republican Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger sacrificed their political careers to join with Democrats on the January 6th Committee. Should our republic survive its current crisis, no doubt our political disagreements with anti-Trump Republicans like them and members of The Lincoln Project will resurface. Until then, welcome to the party, pals.