Posted on 12/29/2014 4:51:08 PM PST by cotton1706
“...a wonderful choice for Speaker, in Candyland.”
Know your target audience. Speaking of which, isn’t it time for an end of the year “Matlock Marathon”?
“Enough of this nonsensical garbage, please.”
AMEN!
Wishing you all a Happy New Year.
Say the House elects non-member Allen West (as someone who refused to try and get his seat back after it was stolen in 2012 he would be a fabulous choice), Pelosi would have standing to sue, and why wouldn't she?
With the number of freepers gung-ho for this non-member Speaker garbage Mark Levin must be among those pushing it it. Sorry Mark, you're wrong, it's not constitutional just because the wording is vague enough to not explicitly rule it out. It's also stupid, very stupid.
Hey, how about Ronald Reagan as Speaker, you know he is DEAD but so what? Do you you think they have "Matlock" on down at the Old County Buffet?
“Do you you think they have “Matlock” on down at the Old County Buffet?”
YES!!! YES, YOU ANIMAL!!!
The House majority can pick whoever they want as speaker for the same reason the Senate majority can get rid of or create a filibuster rule. The courts won't tell them how to run their houses.
RE:”With the number of freepers gung-ho for this non-member Speaker garbage Mark Levin must be among those pushing it it. Sorry Mark, you're wrong, it's not constitutional just because the wording is vague enough to not explicitly rule it out. It's also stupid, very stupid. “
Its just more talk radio silliness. Not serious.
Lou Gomert was subbing for Hannity on his radio show today.
That shows how serious he is about this,
Ah, but Reagan is GOPe! GOPe! GOPe! Only His Holiness The All Wise and Knowing Mark Levin is worthy to be Speaker, of course. After all, the Constitution means whatever The Great Levin says it does.
When the Founding Fathers created the position of Speaker of the House, they based it on the Speaker of the British Parliament. The Speaker of the British Parliament always has been a member of Parliament, and when the Constitution says that House members shall choose their Speaker, it obviously referred to their election of one if them to preside over the House. The fact that the “other officers” (such as sergeant-at-arms, parliamentarian, chaplain, etc.) are not members of the House doesn’t mean that the Speaker can be a non-member. Whether SCOTUS will rule that anyone has standing to sue, or that it is a justiciable question at all, I don’t know, but even if SCOTUS rules it a political question it still wouldn’t make it any less unconstitutional.
Regarding a possible anti-Boehner coup, even if 30 Republicans vote “present” or otherwise refuse to vote for Speaker (which won’t happen, or else Boehner wouldn’t gave been renominated as Speaker by the GOP confefence), Boehner will be elected Speaker with 217 votes (or 216, I guess, since Grimm will resign the day before the vote). The Congressional Research Service reported on Speaker elections a few years ago, and asserted that the requirement is that the Speaker be elected by a majority of “members that voted for a person.” Several Speakers have been elected by less than a majority of the total House membership, most recently Newt Gingrich in 1997 (when enough Republicans voted “present” or abstained so as to lower the denominator of votes cast for actual persons). So those 30 anti-Boehner Republicans will have to vote for one or more actual persons to stop Boehner from being elected Speaker, and, if recent history holds, less than 5 will do so (there was even stronger “coup talk” two years ago, and I think that 3 Republicans voted for someone other than Boehner). And if there are 60 of those (largely mythical) Republicans Representatives that want Boehner kicked out but weren’t brave enough to run for Soeaker or even oppose Boehner’s renomination at the GOP conference, I hope that they don’t all vote “present” or abstain, because if 60 Republicans abstain from voting for an actual person then Nancy Pelosi will be elected Speaker with 188 Democrat votes. Nancy Pelosi—now *there’s* a Speaker of whom Mark Levin could be proud!
SO basically we are stuck with the spineless pos...
“SO basically we are stuck with the spineless pos...”
Until someone steps up and challenges Boehner, and gets a majority of Republican Representatives to back him or her? Yes. The fact that no one even challenged Boehner when the House Republican conference met in November makes me think that Boehner will stay in there at least for the near future.
Yeah. Where was the opposition to Bohener a few weeks ago when he was unanimously renominated as GOP nominee for Speaker? No where. What was Paulbot Tom Massie doing then? Sitting on his hands? Really I have no love for anyone trying to score cheap points by half-assedly “opposing” Bohener now.
Last time’s Speaker vote BTW
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll002.xml
Bridensine, Pearce, and Yoho voted for CANTOR (pretty sure this was AFTER freepers decided Cantor was scum)
Broun (lost Senate primary in 2014 thank God) and Gohmert went for non-member ALLEN WEST (who had “lost” reelection)
Paulbot Tom Massie voted for Paulbot Justin AMASH,
Amash himself voted for RAUL LABRADOR (who did not vote himself)
Huelskamp voted for JIM JORDAN of OH
RINO Walter Jones voted for non-member former US Comptroller General David Walker in a true “WTF” move for the ages, I’m so unhappy that Jones wasn’t defeated for renomination
And finally Steve Stockman did by far the least clownish thing and voted “present”.
Some rats also voted against Pelosi
Lipinski and McIntyre (gone) voted for DJ’s Rep COOPER
Cooper himself voted for non member COLIN POWELL
Dingel voted for MATHESTON (gone)
Barrow (bye!) voted for his his GA colleague JOHN LEWIS (who did not vote himself)
Zero rats voted against her in 09 and 07 of course. All pointless nonsense just like writing in “Donald Duck”. All of them just made themselves look stupid aside from Stockman.
Excuse me, Matheson voted for Dingell, not the other way around. Dingell voted for Nancy.
All right.
That does it.
I’LL take the damn job... get me in there.
For Minimum Wage too.
As a matter of fact - we should make it a matter of vote - Should Congress have to work for Minimum Wage, and be subjected to ObamanationCare like the rest of us?
Haha. While it’s quite tempting to consider reducing Congressional salary to peanuts I fear it would result in ONLY millionaires ever running for Congress.
It doesn't work that way.
That's not exactly news,
but if you think about it the GOPe/RINOs won most of the 2014 primaries and afterward Dems got their butts kicked in the election while Bohner did his best to keep the GOP out of the news, so its hard to replace someone who looks like a winner,
Late 2012 early 2013 after the loss was a better time to clean house but no Republican in the House showed any interest in his job when the vote came up, recall the outrage here back then when the House went along with extending some of the Bush tax cuts,
Lou Gomert (R-Texas)still shows no interest in that job, he was subbing for Hannity the other day talking about what the House ‘should have done’.
Millionaires, or people so corrupt that they count on making money on the side by selling their vote.
Well, just consider making ME Speaker...
I can be bought... Cheap... :^)
A box of ammo, a jug of cheap wine, and a bimbo or two. I’m easy.
Yeah... I know...
Would be nice to force them, though, wouldn’t it...
You himbo!!! :)
I’m corruptible... for the right price.
See? I can be a politician too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.