Tag Archives: GOP

national news

Pelosi picks Kinzinger for select panel … yes!

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Adam Kinzinger is going to join another courageous Republican on a select congressional committee with the aim of finding out what the heck happened on Jan. 6 when the Insurrectionist in Chief egged on a mob to storm the Capitol Building.

Kinzinger is one of a handful of Republicans who voted to impeach the ex-POTUS for that act. Another Republican House member, Liz Cheney, also is serving on the committee selected by Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

GOP House leader Kevin McCarthy blames Pelosi for politicizing the process. Hah! McCarthy needs to check his defiance at the door and ponder something.

Congress had the chance to select an independent bipartisan commission to examine the Jan. 6 riot. Republicans in both legislative chambers balked. They refused to appoint the commission. So this is what we get: a select panel chosen by a Democratic House speaker.

Pelosi vetoed two of five GOP House members McCarthy selected: Jim Jordan and Jim Banks. McCarthy’s response then was to yank the three who made the cut from the committee.

So … Pelosi is now moving ahead. She has a bipartisan select committee getting ready to do its work.

The insurrection of Jan. 6 was an unprecedented event. The mob of terrorists sought to overturn the results of a legal, free and fair presidential election. The committee will want to get at the root of what caused the riot and presumably seek ways to prevent a recurrence.

Reps. Kinzinger and Cheney believe in the rule of law. They are faithful to their oath to protect the Constitution, unlike most of their GOP colleagues, who proclaim their fealty to the ex-Moron in Chief.

I am looking forward to watching this committee slog through its task to reach a conclusion based on the evidence it will receive.

national news

GOP abandons Cheney?

(Photo by Marc Piscotty/Getty Images)

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Even though I know in my gut this won’t happen, I feel the need to suggest it as a possible political explosion that could upend the whole damn clown show unfolding on Capitol Hill.

U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming is facing a potentially serious Republican primary challenge next year. Why? Because she voted to impeach a Republican president for inciting the insurrection that damaged Capitol Hill and killed five people.

The GOP fanatics who are faithful to POTUS 45 are livid with Cheney. House GOP leadership stripped her of her standing as chair of the GOP caucus.

Cheney remains a conservative lawmaker. I cannot help but wonder whether there is a limit to the insult and denigration she is willing to take from members of her own political party.

Might there be a partisan switch in Cheney’s future, on the basis that the party she joined has become a cult that adheres to the mindless rants of one man and has forsaken its responsibility to the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law?

I get that it is as likely to happen as the sun rising in the west tomorrow morning. Still, the political tides have turned many politicians into members of the opposing party.

I remember when former state Rep. Warren Chisum of Pampa, Texas, switched from Democrat to Republican. He said plainly that he is the same man he was when he joined the Legislature, but that the Democratic Party had changed its identity.

As for Cheney, she could continue to serve as a conservative in Congress … even as a Democrat. Congress over its long history has welcomed many conservatives to the Democratic caucus in both legislative chambers.

It’s just that the Republican Party now seemingly belongs to the twice-impeached former POTUS who incited a bloody riot on Jan. 6 that sought to overturn the results of the November 2020 presidential election.

How in the world does someone of Cheney’s strong Republican ties remain loyal to a party that no longer is loyal to her or to her belief in the rule of law?

OK. I know I am spitting into the proverbial wind on this one.

It’s worth pondering.

national news

GOP leader skulks away

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

That’ll teach ’em, right, Kevin McCarthy?

The U.S. House Republican leader decided today to pull all GOP members from a select committee chosen by Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Pelosi objected to the presence of two men McCarthy had added to the panel, Reps. Jim Jordan and Jim Banks. They were included on a panel that aims to investigate the Jan. 6 insurrection that sought to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

These men are big fans and supporters of the guy who lost that election and voted to deny President Biden certification that he was the winner. Pelosi would have none of that.

McCarthy decided, therefore, to yank all Republicans. The only GOP House member left on the panel is Liz Cheney, who voted to impeach the former president for his role in inciting the Jan. 6 riot. Cheney, though, doesn’t fit the profile of today’s Republican Party, which is to pledge total, blind and unyielding fealty to the disgraced, twice-impeached former POTUS.

Cheney’s loyalty is to the Constitution, which makes her among the more inspired choices that Pelosi made to the select committee.

Here, though, is what really makes me scratch my noggin: How does McCarthy justify abandoning this select committee selection process, leaving this Jan. 6 probe solely up to Democrats, which he contends only will produce a “partisan” finding of culpability by the ex-POTUS and his GOP pals in Congress?

He could have selected five GOP members who aren’t as fervid in their defense of the indefensible, but no-o-o-o. He turned to Jordan and Banks.

Now he has abandoned any pretext of cooperation with Democrats. McCarthy has chosen instead to level accusations of “partisanship” and “politics” at Pelosi who, I feel the need to remind everyone here, has chosen a Republican to serve on this select panel.

Kevin McCarthy, meanwhile, has left the field in a fit of petulance that doesn’t advance the search for the truth into what happened when the mob stormed the Capitol Building and sought to overturn the democratic process.

national news

It was an ‘insurrection’

1 Comment

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

For several months now, I have been referring to the Jan. 6 riot as an “insurrection,” a term that reportedly gives congressional Republicans a case of the heebie-jeebies.

Senate Republicans didn’t like the term inserted into legislation that called for creation of an independent bipartisan commission to investigate the cause and effect of the insurrection; it also would have sought remedies to prevent it from happening in the future.

Well, you know what? I will continue to call it what it was: an insurrection against the government of the United States of America.

It was nothing short of that. It was a direct frontal assault on the very democratic process which on that day was certifying the results of the 2020 presidential election that resulted in Joe Biden and Kamala Harris  being elected president and vice president of the United States.

The ticket led by the 45th POTUS incited the insurrection, for which the House of Representatives impeached him for a second time. It was a big more of a bipartisan impeachment than the first go-round, with a handful of Republicans joining their Democratic colleagues in impeaching POTUS 45; what’s more, some GOP senators ended up voting to convict the disgraced ex-POTUS at trial.

My point, though, is that no one should shy away from calling the DC riot what it was: an act of insurrection against the government of the United States. For the GOP congressional caucus to dig in against the investigative commission because they dislike truth-telling language is a cheap and shallow attempt to deny the obvious.

The effort to get at the truth behind the insurrection must not end. The House has formed a select committee. It already includes one Republican House member; others should join the effort.

Let’s not be coy about what’s at stake. It is to find a way to prevent future insurrections from occurring.

Ever!

national news

GOP heroes do emerge

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

I once asked — during one of the crises involving the 45th POTUS — whether there were any Republican heroes among members of the GOP congressional caucus.

Two of them have stepped up in the months since that individual left office.

One of them is U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, about whom I have written already on this blog. The other is Illinois U.S. Rep. Adam Kinzinger.

Kinzinger is standing tall and firm in the effort to explore and examine the Jan. 6 insurrection that the 45th POTUS incited with his Big Lie comments on the alleged theft of the 2020 presidential election.

The young congressman wants to know why his fellow Republicans wouldn’t want to look into the cause of the riot if they believe that Antifa, or Black Lives Matter or some other left-wing outfit provoked it. Nor does he understand why they won’t look into the cause of an event that could have put every member of Congress in dire danger of being harmed … or worse.

Kinzinger does pose the question that has piqued many of Americans’ curiosity. He wonders if GOP resistance to a thorough exploration of the insurrection would expose potential Republican complicity in the event. 

Hmm. Makes you wonder, yes?

Because he and Rep. Cheney are searching for the truth behind the assault on our democracy, they are being vilified by the cult followers who refuse to accept the legitimacy of the free, fair and legal election.

The challenges they face quite possibly could tell us plenty about the Republican Party to which they both remain faithful. Except that the party now has been hijacked by the con man who masqueraded as POTUS for four years.

Political heroes who seek to defend the Constitution and the democratic process do not deserve to be treated as pariahs. They should be honored, not pilloried.

State news

Play hardball, Democrats

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

There are times when you have to go for broke if you intend to preserve what you believe are basic democratic tenets.

Texas legislative Democrats walked off the floor of the House of Representatives near the end of the Legislature’s regular session to prevent House Republicans from forcing a vote on restrictions to the state election laws.

Gov. Greg Abbott was so angry he decided to call a special legislative session that begins in a couple of days to enact those changes. The question now for Democrats is this: Do they hang tough or do they buckle? I urge them to maintain their unity in opposing these restrictions.

There needs to be a show of strength among those who say they cherish the right to grant all Americans the ability to vote. They say they favor greater, not lesser, voter participation. The 2020 presidential election produced a significant increase in voter turnout, which brought President Biden closer to carrying the state’s electoral votes than any time since the 1976 election, which Jimmy Carter carried the state en route to his presidential election victory.

GOP lawmakers want to limit early voting opportunities, they seek to ban people from delivering bottles of water to voters waiting in long lines to cast their ballots, and they want to make it easier for judges to overturn election results. And why? Because they have fallen for The Big Lie about “rampant vote fraud” where it doesn’t exist.

Texas Democrats have learned how to play the same game of hardball that Republicans have perfected over many years in Texas.

My advice to Democrats? Stay the course.

national news

Liz Cheney produces conflicting emotions

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

It is no secret to those who read this blog that Liz Cheney drives me batty.

The congresswoman from Wyoming is among the most conservative members of the House of Representatives. Her Republican credentials are impeccable, as she comes from a family led by a former defense secretary, congressman and vice president of the United States.

I didn’t support her decision to run for Congress; I believed her to be a carpetbagger, as she never spent much time in the state she now represents.

But, man, she is showing some spine, guts and conviction in standing against a president who sought to subvert the U.S. Constitution, is still seeking to overturn a free and fair election and has been the voice of idiotic demagoguery from the moment he became a politician prior to his run for the presidency in 2016.

Cheney voted to impeach the ex-POTUS. She stands foursquare on the oath she took to defend the Constitution. Rep. Cheney now is the lone Republican to join a House select committee that is going to examine the consequence of the Jan. 6 insurrection that the former POTUS incited.

House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy threatens to strip her of committee assignments. Liz Cheney continues to stand firm. To which I say … you go, Liz!

Rep. Cheney is taking a stand against blind fealty to a cult leader. She said the integrity of our democratic process is far more important than any loyalty she might feel toward any human being.

I am proud of the stand that Liz Cheney is taking on my behalf and on behalf of the country she took an oath to serve. Her oath makes no mention of any loyalty to a disgraced ex-president.

I salute Liz Cheney.

economic news

POTUS walks back a demand

1 Comment

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

President Biden had me, then he lost me. Then he got me back again.

Biden and a bipartisan group of U.S. senators hammered out a deal on an infrastructure plan. They marched out in front of reporters at the White House and declared “We have a deal.”

Then the president said this: “I expect that in the coming months this summer, before the fiscal year is over, that we will have voted on this bill, the infrastructure bill, as well as voted on the budget resolution. But if only one comes to me, this is the only one that comes to me, I’m not signing it. It’s in tandem.”

As the saying goes: Oops!

GOP senators accept Biden walk-back on infrastructure | TheHill

Biden signaled right then that he wanted a more expensive and expansive infrastructure deal that only Democrats could approve. He drew complaints from Republicans and from Democratic moderates who worked their tails off trying to hammer out this deal.

Then the president in effect took back what he said.

To which I say that’s a good thing for the cause of good government.

President Biden should take the deal worked out. It’s not as much as he and many others want to spend but, hey, a trillion dollars-plus is still a lot of dough.

As for Biden’s walk-back, his change of tune has satisfied at least two members of the GOP negotiating team — Sens. Mitt Romney of Utah and Rob Portman of Ohio. They both said they “trust” the president and are going to work to ensure that the infrastructure deal upon which they agreed gets through Congress and lands on Biden’s desk.

Americans want their bridges, highways and rail lines to be safe for human activity. They want their seaports and airports to be modernized and made safe for travel. The Internet has become an increasing part of Americans’ lives and they want high-speed Internet service. The infrastructure deal is widely popular among Americans.

The deal worked out by members of both major parties signals the kind of cooperation, camaraderie and common good the president said once was a hallmark of his days as a senator and even as vice president.

He should take this deal all by itself. As for the rest of it, fight that fight another day.

economic news

See? Compromise works!

3 Comments

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

“We have a deal.”

So said President Biden today as he announced a bipartisan agreement to overhaul the nation’s infrastructure.

Now … is this the perfect deal? No. It isn’t. It is the product of Democrats and Republicans coming together, demanding things from the other side, then deciding that absent being able to get all the things they wanted in the deal agreed to a package that is a good bit less than what President Biden wanted to spend.

This is how government is supposed to work.

Fascinating! As The Hill reported: Biden acknowledged the deal would not include proposals he’s made for spending to help American families, but firmly endorsed the deal on infrastructure in unusual remarks just outside the White House with the bipartisan group of senators looking on.

The deal agreed upon would spend $1 trillion. It would repair thousands of miles of roads and bridges, provide high-speed Internet to virtually every home in the country.

More from The Hill: The framework includes $579 billion in new spending for a total of $973 billion over five years and just over $1.2 trillion over eight years.

It allocates $312 billion for transportation programs, including roads, bridges, airports and electric vehicles infrastructure. The remaining $266 billion would go to water infrastructure, broadband, environmental remediation, power infrastructure and other areas. 

Biden announces bipartisan deal on infrastructure | TheHill

The deal announced today strikes me as a classic ploy that President Biden played with perfect pitch. He wanted to spend $2.2 trillion — or so he said. Biden might have known from the get-go he wouldn’t persuade GOP members of Congress to agree to spending that kind of dough. So he settled on a still-significant amount of money.

He said he didn’t get all he wanted. Conservatives in Congress didn’t, either. Nor did their progressive friends.

However, the negotiating team of equal numbers of congressional Republicans and Democrats were all smiles today as they announced the framework of a deal.

Let’s get it done. Shall we?

national news

Why not make the case … and debate?

2 Comments

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Congressional Republicans managed to win the latest battle in their fight to prevent any federal reform of voting practices. They held together to prevent debate on a legislative package proposed by their Democratic colleagues.

This begs the obvious question: If they believe in their argument against overhauling the federal vote system, why do they insist on denying any reasonable, thorough and comprehensive debate on it on the floor of the U.S. Senate?

I have a theory. It goes like this: They aren’t interested in the issues attached to Democrats’ proposal; they merely want to suppress the vote by making it more difficult for Democratic-leaning voters to cast their ballots.

That’s my way of suggesting that if they are forced to argue the merits of their case, they would lose the war.

Public opinion aligns with the Democrats’ view of voter reform. The public opposes Republican efforts to suppress voters’ access to elections.

Democrats today lost the latest skirmish in this overall war. They did manage to hold their own 50-member caucus together. The problem was it wasn’t enough to break through the 60-vote barrier that would have been required to commence debate on this issue.

I will stay tuned, though, for this struggle to continue. My hope is that we can get past the obstructionism being orchestrated by the once-Grand Old Party.