In previous years, members of the minority party have turned to new, young governors to present a fresh face to the country during the brief response that is shown on television after the president’s speech. But that has not always worked.
Example given: Bobby Jindal, last year in 2009.
Instead, this year, Republicans are turning to one of their senior members who has been given broad authority by Mr. Boehner to use his new position on the budget committee to drive the Republican fiscal agenda through the House.
"Their wish for Second Amendment activism has been fulfilled—senseless hatred leading to murder, lunatic fringe anarchism, subscribed to by John Boehner, mainstream rebels with vengeance for all, even nine-year-old girls." One of the survivors of the Tucson massacre, Eric Fuller, says that is what he wrote down after staying up "most of the night" in the hospital, trying to calm himself down and organize his thoughts, and writing out (from memory) the text of the Declaration of Independence.
But you never hear them ask the obvious follow up question: do you still feel this way? And if you look at the rest of the report, created today, it is obvious that these people are completely dishonest. They have deliberately skewed every other piece of evidence to indict the right wing, leaving out every piece of evidence that might exonerate their targets. Why should we think they presented this man’s entire statement?
One thing I noticed (and York doesn't mention) is that Pelosi made a snide remark about the size of the gavel Boehner picked out for the gavel-passing ritual:
I now pass this gavel, which is larger than most gavels here but the gavel of choice of Mr. Speaker Boehner…
Now, my ears have been tuned by decades of immersion in feminism and Freudianism, and I say that's an intentional reference to the phallus and the will toward domination it symbolizes. Nancy Pelosi intended to provoke disrespectful titters, I think — with deniability, of course.
Instead of calling Pelosi on her disrespect, comedian Jimmy Kimmel runs with the feminism and visualizes domestic* violence:
"... against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
That's the wording of the oath of office taken by members of Congress, used yesterday as Chief Justice John Roberts "presided over a closed-door ceremony in the offices of the soon-to-be House speaker, John A. Boehner of Ohio, to swear in his staff a day before Republicans are scheduled to take control of the chamber."
I'm linking to the NYT, where the first comment is "did he cry?" Boehner, famously, cries easily, and I think the oath actually is the sort of thing that would move him to tears. Read it. Seriously. Does it reach you in a deep place that gives rise to tears? If not, why not?
How many members of Congress take that oath with mental reservation and purpose of evasion and don't even feel a twinge of conscience when they say those words? How many members of Congress take that oath and it's just words — written more than a hundred years ago — and they don't even have a spark of awareness of what they are promising to do, so the purpose of evasion doesn't even flicker across a synapse?
IN THE COMMENTS: The Crack Emcee says:
And, after all that, you're surprised how I talk about marriage?
I would never have said this out loud, but I couldn't help thinking how interesting it was that Feingold shaped his whole lecture around the sanctity of the oath, when just a few days ago he announced that he was getting a divorce, his second. Was I the only one who thought how strange it was to hear a man piously invoke a passionate fidelity to an oath when he had -- so conspicuously -- gone back on the marriage oath twice?\
But I like Senator Feingold. I do think he's a good man. I don't presume to know what happens to people in their marriages, and I am divorced myself. Nevertheless, he could have discussed his devotion to the Constitution from some perspective other than the fact that he'd sworn an oath. Taking an oath to the Constitution, after all, is not the strongest reason to support it.
"He eats breakfast alone at Pete's Diner, a cramped eatery a few blocks from the Capitol, and checks his Facebook page on an iPad. At night, he stops whatever he's doing at 10 o'clock."
Boehner's got a nice, humble image that suits the times — these post-Pelosi times. I like the picture of the man who's replacing the woman being a man with a vacuum cleaner...
... and it's not even a metaphorical vacuum cleaner. (I seem to remember a magazine cover illustration of Gerald Ford after the Nixon resignation. He was vacuuming the Oval Office.)
3. "I'm more comfortable with Fox," say I, after watching CNN for a while and then switching.
4. Oh, CNN is better. Better graphics. Lots of people saying things. Annoying much of the time, but more detail. Mary Matalin enthusing about Portman winning in Ohio, a state Obama won.
9. It's so sad for the Democrats. They gave us so many things. Gifts. Expensive gifts. That we didn't want. That they bought with our money.
10. Tim Kaine blabs on and on, making a happy face. Eventually, Wolf Blitzer cuts hims off with "It's going to be a long night for you.
11. CNN's music for tonight is the same (or just close) to what was used in the HBO John Adams series. It's about the Framers, no? As the Tea Party clinches it.
12. Drudge says: "REPUBLICANS WIN SENATE SEATS: AL, FL, GA, IN, OH, KY, MO, NH, SC... DEMS WIN: CT, DE, MD... TOO CLOSE TO CALL: PA, IL..." Hey, what happened to California? Earlier he was calling it for Boxer.
13. Manchin. "Huge win" for the Democrats, says Wolf Blitzer, about the hot West Virginia race.
14. The GOP takes the House. It's outside of the margin of error, says NBC. Pelosi is gone. Ding dong. [UPDATE: Now MSNBC is calling that "a mistake." MSNBC is awful.]
15. NBC says Wisconsin is "too close to call," as the polls close.
16. Rand Paul victory speech: "I have a message! A message from the people of Kentucky! A message that is loud and clear and does not mince words! We've come to take our government back!"
17. MSNBC is hilarious. They're near meltdown. Rand Paul will destroy America. The Republicans "salivate at the thought" of worldwide economic collapse.
18. O'Donnell conceding. Very cheerful. Chirpy. I listened to Marco Rubio's victory speech a few minutes ago, which was, by contrast, very mellow.
19. Scott Walker has, it seems, won the Governorship here in Wisconsin. That's supposed to mean — that must mean — no to the high-speed train boondoggle. Also in Wisconsin, Russ Feingold is way behind.
20. Feingold has lost, quite decisively. I'm sorry to see him go. He's a good man. But I should admit that I voted against him. I had to vote for the Party of No.
21. Geraldine Ferraro and Sarah Palin appear side-by-side on Fox News, analyzing the elections, denouncing sexism, and then ending on this adorable, ultra-girlie note:
22. Screen shot:
23. I just thought that was amusing, the way YouTube inserted my face into the Fox News. By the way, did you notice, at the end of the clip, when Geraldine said she wanted to go on "Dancing with the Stars," Sarah said "I'll hook you up"?
24. John Boehner tears up talking about American values, which he's chased all his life. Then, talking about his business, he sobs. Keep it together, Boehnsy!
25. That got a little... weird. I hope Boehnsy is ready to lead. Anyway, here in Dane County, Feingold's campaign manager George Aldrich is not giving up: "Russ is down by 80,000 votes, but...up to 1.4 million votes haven’t been counted." None of the Madison votes were in when he said that: "We are confident that this race is going to tighten, it is going to tighten quickly, and we may be in for a long night here."
26. Charles Krauthammer on Fox News: "The Obama agenda is dead." The Democrats have retained the Senate, apparently, but, looking forward to 2012, they will, self-defensively, distance themselves from Obama — says the Kraut.
Quoting Bob Dylan, he said, "My heart is not weary, it's light and free, and I've got nothing but affection for those who have sailed with me."
It is not clear what he will do next, but Mr. Feingold, 57, told the crowd: "It's on to the next fight, it's on to the next battle, it's on to 2012 and it is on to our next adventure, forward." He raised his fist in the air and left the stage.
The Times misses that "Forward" is the state motto. And maybe that "fist in the air" was posing as the Wisconsin "Forward" statue.
28. Karl Rove exclaims that he's "exhausted." I was just saying he looked tired.
29. Speaking of tired, it's interesting that Harry Reid will be sticking around. There's something so dreary about him. Does his victory cheer Democrats? Or would they have had more fun kicking Sharron Angle around?
Now, this from the guy who said in the first month of his administration, you'll remember when I remind you, he had a meeting of Republican and Democrat congressional leaders in the White House and he looked at John Boehner, and he said, "You gotta stop listening to Rush Limbaugh. That's not how things get done in Washington."...
Now, he also said -- we don't have this on the bite -- but he did say if you're a fan of something else you should try Fox News.
What Obama said was "if you’re somebody who only reads the editorial page of The New York Times, try glancing at the page of The Wall Street Journal once in a while." He didn't mention Fox News. He's still not recommending Fox News (or Rush Limbaugh).
Back to Rush:
I mean he tried to balance this out, but the problem with it is that it's not what he does. He's as closed-minded a president as we've ever had. He doesn't listen to opposing points of views. He doesn't want to hear them. Remember the health care summit, the look on his face when Paul Ryan told the truth about health care, you could see the rage. Obama wasn't open to it. He's not open to anybody else's ideas. He may want you to think so, but he's not. What Obama doesn't understand is that you do watch other media. You do read other media. You do listen to other media. You may not do it as much because you don't trust it and like it anymore. You know the New York Times is what it is. You know that the Huffing and Puffington Post is what it is. You know what you're going to get out of TIME Magazine. I play for you on this program what they say.
The sound bites that we play on this show are primarily of people who oppose me or have opposing points of view. I'm not afraid for you to hear what they think. But here's Obama telling the students at University of Michigan Ann Arbor, "Don't be afraid, you know, you Limbaugh fans, don't be afraid." People that listen to this show know more of what Obama and the liberals are saying than people who listen to left-wing shows. We don't hide from it. And the people in this audience are not by any stretch of the imagination uninformed or ignorant about what Obama is, who he is and what he believes.
It is true. Limbaugh's show is mainly him reading or playing sound bites from the liberal media and liberal politicians and then commenting on it. The liberal commentary is always there. He's just also there showing you how to be critical of it. It's very much like blogging, where you have a political blogger who is choosing items he disagrees with and then... as we say... fisking.
[L]ast May, Republicans asked President Obama to hold bipartisan discussions on health care in an attempt to find common ground, but he declined and instead chose to work with only Democrats....
Assuming the President is sincere about moving forward on health care in a bipartisan way, does that mean he will agree to start over so that we can develop a bill that is truly worthy of the support and confidence of the American people?...
Will the President include in this discussion congressional Democrats who have opposed the House and Senate health care bills?...
Will the President be inviting officials and lawmakers from the states to participate in this discussion?...
Will the President require that any and all future health care discussions, including those held on Capitol Hill, meet this common-sense standard of openness and transparency?
Your answers to these critical questions will help determine whether this will be a truly open, bipartisan discussion or merely an intramural exercise before Democrats attempt to jam through a job-killing health care bill that the American people can’t afford and don’t support. ‘Bipartisanship’ is not writing proposals of your own behind closed doors, then unveiling them and demanding Republican support. Bipartisan ends require bipartisan means....
That wasn't meant to be a joke. It just turned out that way. I edited the Boehner/Cantor letter down as I read it and saw that it was a series of questions, so I started reading Gibbs's letter with the idea of editing it down to the parts that responded to the questions. You see what happened.
