... Well, certainly, you understand where Republicans don't think they should be the ones to come across the aisle to vote for a measure that primarily benefits you, which was done in exchange for your vote on a measure they didn't support -- not a single one of them vote for the Inflation Reduction Act.And there's more - she quoted something in 'Politico' from Sen. John Cornyn, "Given what Senator Manchin did on the reconciliation bill, it's engendered a lot of bad blood. There's not a lot of sympathy on our side to provide Senator Manchin a reward." The point of that? Why should the Rs help him now?
Manchin pointed out that the Rs, with his support, have been fighting for - for years - to get this done.
He gently reminded any Rs watching that they weren't successful last time around.
When they had everything, when they -- in 2016 to 2020, Shannon, they had Republican president, Republican House, Republican Senate, we couldn't -- we couldn't move it because I was the only Democrat. Now we're in a position where we have a majority Democrats and our Republican friends can take it across the line.
His closing remarks were also spot on; let me know what you think.
Picking up where Manchin left off, for your Extra Credit, I wandered down the hall to the State of the Union classroom. Jake Tapper talked with two former Tennessee governors, one of each flavor. Phil Bredesen (D) and Bill Haslam (R), are co-hosting a podcast called You Might Be Right.
Tapper delved into the perceived difficulties of trying to have a bipartisan conversation on critical issues in a time of great partisan divide. Here was his first attempt, which Haslam mostly dodged.
Tapper asked Haslam what he'd say to folks who say it's not possible to find common ground "with people who are literally trying to undermine democracy?" Tapper was referring to the many Rs, including the top leaders in the House, who push the Big Lie and, "in the view of many critics, don't seem to have a real commitment to democracy."
He asked it again, suggesting "it's difficult to have an argument" about important topics like taxes, foreign policy, abortion and so on "if the other side won't even accept the results of a free and fair election."
Bredesen took the question this time, pointing out that "if we get stuck on that" there won't be a lot of progress made.
What Bill and I are trying to do is to say, look, there are some issues there that are -- they're very difficult and people are in hard corners, but there's a lot of issues in this country having to do, I mean, with the debt and with the environment and so on, that there are real problems that need solutions. And trying to explore with the public at large, not necessarily with the Congress, but the public at large, as to what some of those common grounds might be, I think, is important.
He also pointed out the difference between two governors talking, and Congress.
I mean, we both were in the business world before politics. We both were mayors and then governors. I mean, those are all jobs where you actually have to do something Monday morning. If there's a problem out there, you're expected to do something to begin to -- begin to solve it. That's just a very different environment than you have in the Congress, for example, where there's very little problem-solving going on, but there's a lot of posturing going on and working to the base. So, I hope that the combination of experiences of the two of us bring something a little different to the discussions as well.
Compare this line of thinking to the utter pettiness of Sen. John Cornyn in the Sunday School recap... maybe Cornyn and the rest of the folks in DC should tune in to the podcast.
I did a few good week/bad week mentions for your TGIF post; here are a couple of them.
Speaking of the gaffe master, he might have exceeded our wildest imaginations at a White House hunger conference this week, when he called out for the late Rep. Jackie Walorski, who was killed in a car accident in August. Walorski was a co-chair of the Hunger Caucus, and was one of the folks who introduced the bill that led to the conference. And, of course, the pack of reporters, hungry as always for a sound-bite and air time, undertook "a series of tense exchanges" trying to get an answer as to why Biden, well, pulled a Biden. Is an answer necessary?
Supreme Court Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was formally sworn in this week, and will take her seat on the bench on Monday, at a time when 60% of us believe the Court is "out of touch" and 66% believe there should be term limits for Justices. Those sentiments aren't indicative of KBJ, of course, but she's coming on the Court at a difficult time, with some tough cases on affirmative action and college admissions, LGBTQ rights, and election issues, among others.
That's a wrap on the week -- I'll be back later, hopefully with a fuller slate of posts and an empty drafts folder.
Wish me luck.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!