The Skewed Framing of the ‘Speaker’ Debate – Shameless Intellectual Un-Seriousness Spreads Well Inside Our Perimeter

The following was posted directly on Ricochet earlier this morning as a message to the members there:

Sure, some of it is just embarrassingly shallow…juvenile taunts like: “They want Hakeem Jefferies as Speaker then?” and “it puts Pat Murray in line after Kamala Harris to be president.” I didn’t take time to relocate the video, but yesterday here on Ricochet I saw where Laura Ingraham desperately and deliberately shoehorned that first one into her interview with Rep. Roy (TX) more than once. He had debunked it as not even the remotest of possibilities the first time but it was as if she was contractually obligated to saying the full talking point three times and, by God, she was going to do it. And she did. It was like watching the tautological chanting by MSNBC (and their comment section minions) of their Anti-Trump Talking Points well beyond the sell by date. 

The more important position to address here is the “they didn’t even have a plan” canard. That keeps being spewed as if a principled objection to Kevin McCarthy and the operation he intends to run for the next two years is not all that is needed to withhold one’s individual vote for the position. (Hint: That IS all that is needed.) If Mr. McCarthy cannot obtain the votes necessary it is the responsibility of the Republicans Caucus to find someone who can…the 20 holdouts are required to do nothing but sit on their hands if that is what they wish to do. Sorry folks. Deal with it.

[SIDE NOTE: Given that Mr. McCarthy and his party will immediately charge each Representative dues roughly equivalent to their annual salary, additional fees on committee positions, and assign additional fund raising requirements that are beyond anything most of us can comprehend, it is more than a bit galling to watch this “just shut up, vote for him, and then get out of the way for the next two years” attitude toward representatives of We the People. But don’t get me started on that…]

Lastly, with apologies to a respected friend (Hey Rufus), even the Red Eye Radio guys are playing a silly game with framing the issue. Last night they intentionally focused their position as if this was only about electing the “face of the party” for the next two years and not about how the operations/functions of the House of Representatives would be conducted under a Republican majority. While there may be elements of both involved, to ignore the latter part is to be just fine with a Pelosi-style operation where a small team of Republicans will run the House with the full, unrestricted power of the Republican majority. There is a difference…and the Pelosi way is corrosive, corruptive, and wrong. 

It is sad to see this kind of intellectual un-seriousness, a staple of media enabled progressive demagoguery for as long as I can remember, slide so easily into the debates within “our” perimeter. (I do appreciate the few strong “voices” back here on the Ricochet Member Feed that continue to do battle against it.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s