comment: >
  
  I know, right? They're thirsty af for that dickpic
context: “Raises worries”.  They were planning 2 years of Hunter Biden investigations.  How were they not worried before? “Confirms” is the word you wanted, not raises.
  Edit: punctuation >
  
  2 years of Hunters dick pics. They were obsessed with Clinton's dick to. These guys just love investigating big white hung dicks and what they do with them.  
  Dont worry about the absolute crooks and wanna be dictators in our party, let's get to the bottom of these naughty dicks >
  
  It's because that kind of stuff worked so well with Clinton. Be outrageousness of the  stain on the dress and what not. Sex scandals have been used to shame Democrats into quitting since then. 
  S***, look what they did to Katie Hill. That should have been a crime but instead Republicans shamed her into stepping down from her position. >
  
  Damn i just looked into Katie hill. Accused of having an affair, admitted a different affair then resigned, daily mail published her nudes, she sued, ordered to pay 200k to daily mail then declared bankruptcy last year.
  Damn >
  
  Why did she have to pay 200k to the Daily Mail? >
  
  Their legal costs >
  
  Hold on so they published nude photos of her, she sued them and then had to pay their legal costs?   Wtf >
  
  In December 2020, Hill filed a lawsuit against her ex-husband, the Daily Mail, and RedState over "non consensual porn".[63] On April 7, 2021, a judge ruled in favor of the Daily Mail, finding that the photos are protected as "a matter of public issue or public interest" under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Hill's attorneys say they plan to appeal the decision.[64][65][66] The judge also ordered Hill to pay roughly $220,000 in fees to the Daily Mail and a couple of journalists.[67]  
  Yup. Aren't judges amazing sometimes? >
  
  Is love to hear the judge’s explanation as to why nude pictures are  "a matter of public issue or public interest" 
  Like seriously WTF. >
  
  The people who are voting against McCarthy indicated all along they'd do so. Republican leadership refused to develop alternate solutions. Instead Republican leadership just assumed the Redwave victory would be so large that it wouldn't matter. They misjudged. 
  Another Major problem is that Republicans have no policy agenda. Rather they are a party entirely built around personality branding. McCarthy doesn't care what does or doesn't get accomplished in the next Congress. He only cares that he gets to be Speaker. Likewise folks like MTG & Gaetz only care about booking podcast appearances and raising money. 
  When the fight is for fame and not policy no amount of compromise or concession is enough. >
  
  
  Rather they are a party entirely built around personality branding.
  
  Well stated. >
  
  Someone called them congressional kardashians >
  
  I prefer "legislative terrorists" >
  
  Yeah but do they legislate >
  
  When it comes to hurting women or minorities? You betcha! >
  
  But they didn’t legislate anything.  They let the Supreme Court overturn Roe.  Since they have tried to let the people decide like in KY and the people have shot down that BS and voted for choice. >
  
  It’s the anniversary of the insurrection, and you’re telling me this shit show is “raising questions”? >
  
  Also, didn't they remove all the metal detectors from the building? >
  
  
  "I think they need to be removed from the Capitol, filled with Tannerite and blown up."
  
  Lauren Boebert, the child. >
  
  The cursed child >
  
  The child who (shouldn't have) lived. >
  
  Like the two children she aborted? >
  
  The word the “freedom house caucus” would prefer to use is “murdered”. Except it now is about one of them and suddenly it is her body her choice. But for everyone else! >
  
  That's because they believe "The only moral abortion is my abortion." >
  
  Worry? The GOP hasn't been interested in governance in decades. We know exactly what we're going to get: phony investigations (and likely a phony impeachment as payback), government shutdowns, and lots of grandstanding about "illegals" while blocking all attempts at immigration reform. >
  
  And blocking all attempts at tax reform, healthcare reform, financial regulation, environmental regulation, etc….. >
  
  Why would they want to help their constituents? They’ll vote for them no matter what. 
  As the NRA lady so eloquently put it about Hershel Walker “ it doesn’t matter if he paid for a 1000 abortions he’s a Republican“(might be off a little but very close) >
  
  
  (might be off a little but very close)
  
  It was even more histrionic than that!
  "I don't care if Herschel Walker paid to abort endangered baby eagles. I want control of the Senate!" >
  
  American politics is beneath satire 🤣 >
  
  Republicans can't govern.  They haven't been able to for decades. >
  
  They had literally no platform during the last presidential election.  It’s not just that they can’t govern, they don’t even want to. >
  
  They literally copied and pasted their previous platform at the last convention and forgot to change the year. Not even joking. >
  
  They did change the year. But they forgot to change references to the “tyrannical Presidential regime” (about Obama) in the platform, so their 2020 platform ended up denouncing the Trump regime. >
  
  They also kept PR statehood even though the current party doesn't seem to support that at all. Really shows how far down the toilet they've gone even since the W years when their President at least pretended to try to speak Spanish. >
  
  I hated W as much as the next sane person, but I think he was actually fluent in Spanish IIRC. >
  
  Idk if he was fluent, at least proficient, but Jeb is definitely fluent >
  
  Jeb is, yes. His wife is also Mexican American. I think the Bushes were at least slightly sincere about trying to make the party more inclusive. >
  
  The Republican party under Bush wasn't sincere about being inclusive of Mexican Americans and Latinos in general. They were pragmatic about their demographics in service to maintaining their own power.
  The current batch of Republicans just are more racist than they are power hungry. It's why they're going full speed on fascism, voter suppression and gerrymandering. They want the power and don't care about being viewed as legitimate. >
  
  
  The current batch of Republicans just are more racist than they are power hungry. It's why they're going full speed on fascism, voter suppression and gerrymandering. They want the power and don't care about being viewed as legitimate. 
  
  I'm absolutely convinced that this is because of short sighted propaganda meant to manipulate people into voting for Republicans. The people vote for the reps they want and Faux News, Newsmax, et al, all took the race bait method. Add in the racism shared around social media between individuals of the same political colors and it's no surprise that the GOP becomes more extreme over time. The people are getting who they want to represent them and they happen to be among the worst of us... 
  All because some ultra wealthy people want to keep squeezing every penny/effort out of the population and prevent any taxation on themselves... >
  
  Anyone who has been paying attention knows republicans haven’t had any interest in governing for a very long time. During the Obama administration, McConnell made it clear that their only priority was sabotaging Obama so he wouldn’t be re-elected. After the Affordable Care Act was passed they talked for years about how they were going to repeal and replace it. They had years to come up with alternatives and came up with absolutely nothing. 
  When Trump became president, they had the majority in congress and they still couldn’t come up with a replacement plan and tried to repeal it anyway. Fortunately a small number of republicans with a sense of self preservation saw the problem with this and stopped the repeal. 
  With the presidency and congress under their control their only meaningful legislative accomplishment was giving a tax break to their wealthy donors. >
  
  Say what you will about McCain, but his unexpected thumbs down that day was both hilarious and relieving. >
  
  The elephant in the room is who McCarthy is choosing to make concessions to.
  He can make either make concessions to more conservative Democrats to try to get them on his side and maybe try to govern for all Americans, or he can give concessions to extreme Republicans who aren't interested in governing at all.  
  He has chosen to throw in with the election deniers and insurrectionists. >
  
  Don't forget, kevin is an election denier as well.. >
  
  That's something that has bothered me about all of this coverage. They act like McCarthy is just a good guy trying to get this job and now he's having to concede to the crazies in the party. 
  He is also a fucking crazy in the party. My wife asked me why they were voting against him and I realized I honestly don't know other than they just don't like him and I'm not sure why they don't like him. I know why I don't like him, but I don't like him for the same reasons I don't like any members of the GOP, so I assume my reasons for hating him aren't the same as the 20 republicans voting against him. >
  
  They are authoritarians.  The reason they don't vote for him is that voting for him doesn't increase their own position in the hierarchy.  But NOT voting for him shows their power over him, and so does, in a way. >
  
  This was the thing that did it? >
  
  As we should all be learning, there is no single tipping point. There are many tipping points.
  Each person is an individual who has a line that they consider the Point of No Return. For some, the inability to simply start the year. For others, it was racist remarks. For yet others, it was trying to overthrow the government.
  We all have different lines. >
  
  for me it was Trump mocking a disabled journalist
  That's the fearless leader >
  
  I will still never understand how that wasn't the end of it right there.  I've got a brother with several physical disabilities, and when I saw trump do that, I assumed that was the end of it.  No matter how cruel and immature his base was, they wouldn't tolerate that. >
  
  Howard Dean yelled loudly. I watched it live. Then I saw the headlines. I was totally confused on what they were talking about. How getting excited actually eliminated him as a candidate.
  USA is a bit fucked up with priorities though. You can watch a hundred people die on TV, but Janet Jackson flashed her nipple for 2 seconds and the religious folks acted like knowing nipples exist was somehow harming their children. >
  
  The thing about the Howard Dean "scream" is that they only had the direct audio from his mic isolated from the very loud, cheering crowd, so made it sound totally ridiculous out of context. Someone published a pretty biting paper about it going into the details. 
  So, yeah I agree it wasn't a good reason to tank a candidacy even as it appeared, but it was a completely overhyped "moment" in a campaign based on a mundane technical detail most voters wouldn't understand.
  It's crazy how just one little misunderstanding or disingenuous characterization like that can alter a presidential campaign, and at the end of the day, the history of US politics, and because of the fact the US is still a superpower, the history of the world.
  It also shows how much of a circus and  unnecessary drama the media likes to try to conjure up in presidential primaries - people think candidates often sound like robots, which they often do, but I can kind of see why with how vapid most voters and the media can be about what at the end of the day is just electing a person to represent your own beliefs on being governed. >
  
  To everyone that just started worrying about the GOP ability to govern over this, welcome! It's a shame you didn't realize in the 80s, or the 90s, or the early 2000s, or the early 2010s, but hey, better late then never. >
  
  The political media is either completely ignorant and incompetent OR it is actively aiding and abetting Republican fascism. >
  
  The second one. >
  
  Definitely the second one. >
  
  Hey!
  No reason it can’t be a little bit of both. >
  
  You are talking about a party in which 147 elected members voted not to certify the 2020 election. They and those who elected them have no credibility any more, so why would anyone expect them to govern? >
  
  
  147 members voted not to certify the election
  
  Including McCarthy himself >
  
  This isn't raising worries -- it's confirming our existing worries.
  Remember, McCarthy was pissed that McConnell went and did a budget deal weeks before the GOP was set to take over the House. Why did McConnell do that? 
  /waves arms to draw attention to current situation >
  
  Not pissed about the budget, pissed that he wouldn't have the opportunity to hold America hostage over the budget. >
  
  gotta wait for next year kids.
  this is like January 6th, but the terrorists got in there via legal means. >
  
  Which is funny because today is January 6 >
  
  I mean, there ain't exactly a disconnection between the republicans in that chamber and the republicans who were there 2 years ago with the terrorists. It's a very diminishing venn diagram. >
  
  There are two newly elected members who were in the crowd at the rally. >
  
  I wish the news media would get hip to the fact that this is literally all the GOP wants now.
  They are the party of purposeful inaction (progress is inherently progressive, after all) and show business. They have dominated the news cycle for a week+ and CSPAN has never had such ratings as they have had this week. It’s literally a perfect scenario for them.
  And once McCarthy inevitably gets the gavel they get to move on to the spectacle that will be Hunter Biden’s laptop. 
  This playbook has 2 pages and they are literally nailing every page >
  
  Let’s be frank Republicans have no concept of governance nor do they have any intent to govern. All that they intend to do is obstruct and score points to battle a non-existent opponent. This is the face and truth of the modern conservative movement - a cult of fraud, self promotion, grifting and scamming the public. >
  
  We are all Frank. >
  
  Frank Burns? >
  
  We are all Ferret Face on this blessed day. >
  
  “You…you…”
  “Who are you calling a you-you?” >
  
  it's going to be a real shit show >
  
  Part of me feels like this is performative at this point. The Sedition Caucus gets what they want: their names in the proverbial lights of social media; they Rs get to drive the narrative away from the anniversary of their attempt to overthrow the government of the United States, and McCarthy will concede, when the timing is right, to just about everything they all want so he doesn't have to move his shit out of the Speaker's office.
  Today, of all days, attention should be given to ONLY what these traitors enabled two years ago. Nothing more. >
  
  The one thing that keeps me from thinking this is all coordinated theater is how genuinely and desperately McCarthy has wanted this position. The 20 dissenters, sure they're doing this for fun. But the GOP as a whole, I don't buy it. No way Kevin would agree to put up with this many failed votes with the same exact results just to troll. >
  
  I feel like they all just got too used to voting No on everything that they just can't stop >
  
  Well if they don’t get this figured soon how are we going to get more pictures of Hunter Biden’s junk?