mspart

May I just say that his last name is just killer!! mspart

This! mspart

Perhaps. Does anyone in Congress deserve to be on the Intelligence Committee anyway? But indeed, what goes around comes around. mspart

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/mccarthy-expected-3-democrats-off-house-committees/story?id=96344389 McCarthy expected to keep 3 Democrats off House committees His targets are Reps. Ilhan Omar, Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell. Speaker Kevin McCarthy and leading Republicans are expected to soon make good on a vow to keep three Democrats from seats on influential committees in the new House. McCarthy's focus is Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, who has served on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, as well as Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, two California lawmakers who have served on the House Intelligence Committee. "Speaker McCarthy confirms that Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, and Ilhan Omar are getting kicked off the Intel and Foreign Affairs Committees. Promises made. Promises kept!" Rep. Troy Nehls, a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, tweeted on Tuesday. ... House Majority Leader Steve Scalise was asked during a press conference on Tuesday what the process would be for stripping members of their assignments and said no one had yet been assigned to committees. But he suggested removals were a new standard first set by Democrats. "As we see what comes out, the Democrats set a precedent that we urged them strongly not to go down last Congress," Scalise said. "They decided that they were going to break the precedent that had been in place for over 200 years and remove members of the opposing party that our party selected to be on committees," he continued. "And so that was a practice they set and so, obviously, we're going to be looking very closely at who they appoint. They haven't appointed anybody yet to committees, but we're gonna see if they do." ... McCarthy has accused Schiff of lying to the public during references to a disputed dossier that claimed to outline links between former President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign and Russia. McCarthy has also called Swalwell a "national security threat" for Swalwell's reported run-ins with an alleged Chinese spy, stating there's no way he should be allowed to serve on the committee. ... Separately, McCarthy's criticized Omar over what he described as her "repeated antisemitic and anti-American remarks." Let's see. Schiff has touted the Steele Dossier as truth even after it was completely debunked. Off the Intelligence Committee. Swalwell slept with a Chinese spy. Off the Intelligence Committee. Omar has repeatedly made anti-Semitic comments. Off the Foreign Affairs Committee. These actions should have been taken by Pelosi on the last two if nothing else, but she didn't. Schiff is a maybe from a Pelosi point of view, but the other two should have been no brainers. mspart

Quite!!!!!!!! Possibly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! mspart!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/speaker-of-the-house-ousted-motion-to-vacate-rcna64902 How a speaker of the House can be ousted with a 'motion to vacate' Speaker Kevin McCarthy made concessions to the far-right to get his job, including changing the rules to allow any member of Congress to force a vote to remove him. Jan. 10, 2023, 11:20 AM PST By Kyle Stewart WASHINGTON — In his bid to become speaker of the House, Rep. Kevin McCarthy agreed to a number of concessions to secure the support of Republicans who originally opposed him. One was a rule change to allow just a single member to try to force him from office. Under the new House rules passed Monday, only one member of Congress — Democrat or Republican — is needed to bring a "motion to vacate," which forces a vote on removing the speaker. That would need only a simple majority of the House to pass to oust McCarthy. This spells it out in very clear language. mspart

I read this in the article: What about Democrats? Clearly Democrats are loathe to throw McCarthy a lifeline in his bid to become speaker, but it's not clear how they would handle an effort to remove the gavel from his hands. If Democrats did vote to remove the speaker, that would give McCarthy a cushion of four votes. He would be removed if five or more Republicans voted with all Democrats. I assumed that this meant they one of their corps could object to the speaker and a vote would be had. On second reading, it appears to just be talking about a general vote, not the one person instigating it. I'll see if I can find clarification. mspart

12-20. OKST won. ORST won 4 matches. HWT, 125, and 157 were very close wins for OKST - One pointers. I'd say the Beavs did pretty well, better than I expected. I think they got a great deal with Pendleton. Hopefully he can drive some excitement there and get some good recruits. I can't tell you how happy I am that Zalesky is no longer there. 149: Voinovich (OKST) MD Gurr (OSU) 10-2 157: Gfeller (OKST) DEC Crosby (OSU) 10-9 165: Olguin (OSU) SV-1 Sheets (OKST) 7-5 174: Olmos (OSU) DEC Plott (OKST) 9-4 184: Munoz (OSU) DEC Wittlake (OKST) 4-3 197: Harvey (OSU) DEC Surber (OKST) 14-9 HWT: Doucet (OKST) DEC Dixon (OSU) 3-2 125: Mastrogiovanni (OKST) DEC Kaylor (OSU) 3-2 133: Fix (OKST) MD Shaner (OSU) 12-4 141: Young (OKST) DEC Belton (OSU) 6-2 mspart

VR archery is a gas. mspart

Stalling on top guy should be "not trying to score or improve their position". Not trying for the fall should be in the list of stalling. Improving your position is getting the bottom guy to his back. From there it is to pin. This does not incentivize the top wrestler to do anything other than stay in the middle and STALL. mspart

Quite the research you have done. Isn't it amazing that PSU did so well as soon as Cael took over? It didn't take long to become dominant. Very interesting. mspart

Many years ago, I remember that match, I was there at Oregon State in Corvallis OR. I remember they announced that Burley was a true freshman and I thought it was pretty cool that he won. I also remember the Oregon St. Hwt Howard Harris who pinned his way through the tourney. I was about a junior in HS and my Dad took me with his buddy and his buddy's son. mspart

You say that like it is a bad thing!! mspart

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/motion-vacate-key-sticking-point-gop-speaker-battle/story?id=96241364 This article explains how the vote of no confidence is initiated, by either R or D. mspart

Interesting. 1. I have read that both Ds and Rs can ignite a vote of no confidence. So I don't think you are correct there. 2. This may come to nothing, but you did not answer but that is not why you are against it. Are you philosophically against investigating FBI, or just think there is nothing there? 3. Agreed!! 4. There have not been many budgets passed over the several decades you refer to. So no real issue there that I see. They should have as many spending bills as there are departments in the administration, then maybe one for the Judiciary and Legislative branches. No more sneaking in things via amendment that have nothing to do with that US Dept. 5. Yes it is in Congress' lap and that's why it is in the concessions. Well the "not war on drugs" certainly isn't working as more people than ever are dying due to drug overdose. 6. Will not argue this point. Like I said, I really am on the fence. Depends where the funds go to. 7. This is a tired old argument that will get nowhere. But you are not, apparently, for a budget that is more real with income and spending. Or you would have said so rather than bring up debt from different admins. I think it is good policy to only spend what comes in. Call me crazy but you and I need to do it, our States need to do it, our National govt should do it too. Thanks for your thoughts, mspart

Jason, That's pretty funny. Thanks for adding that to the mix here. mspart

It would take time away from the "important" business of the House and make the R's look like they can't control anything. One D could say I want a vote, and all Ds will vote against the Speaker, they only need 5 R's do the same and then the speaker is no more. Good for the Ds if they don't want to play those games. mspart

As has been reported, it will only take a single congressperson, acting in what is known as a Jeffersonian Motion, to move to remove the Speaker if he or she goes back on their word or policy agenda. A “Church” style committee will be convened to look into the weaponization of the FBI and other government organizations (presumably the CIA, the subject of the original Church Committee) against the American people. Term limits will be put up for a vote. Bills presented to Congress will be single subject, not omnibus with all the attendant earmarks, and there will be a 72-hour minimum period to read them. The Texas Border Plan will be put before Congress. From The Hill: “The four-pronged plan aims to ‘Complete Physical Border Infrastructure,’ ‘Fix Border Enforcement Policies,’ ‘Enforce our Laws in the Interior’ and ‘Target Cartels & Criminal Organizations.’” COVID mandates will be ended as will all funding for them, including so-called “emergency funding.” Budget bills would stop the endless increases in the debt ceiling and hold the Senate accountable for the same. 1. For for this one, as I understand it, it is not limited to the party in power, but to every House member. I don't think this is viable hence my comment on D's using this at least once a week. If it is limited to the Rs for this Congress, I still don't like it as it will be very disruptive. 2. I think this is a great idea as there is at least half the country that believes the FBI has been weaponized against conservatives and their ideology. 3. This may happen but is moot as discussed. 4. Single subject bills is good. A Defense bill should not be including stuff for DHS, National Parks, Aunt Trudy's favorite cause etc. Single subject like defense, or HHS, or what have you. 72 hours to read them is quite reasonable and requires a minimum of planning and administration. The omnibus bill is something no one could read in 72 hours and it had all kinds of subjects. My understanding is that if an amendment comes up that is off topic, it is summarily rejected as out of order. This is all good. 5. The border is porous, the admin is not following the law and allowing millions to enter and with them millions in drugs coming across the border. Something needs to happen to close the border. 6. Again, I'm not sure about this one. I am not a Covid hawk and want all kinds of money for it. But there are some folks still hurting from the economic paralysis that occurred due to it. I am not a covid denier, I have it. It wasn't fun. But there was entirely too much money piled into this. Something needs to be looked at rationally here but I don't think that comes with a stop all funding idea. 7. Continuing to spend more and borrow more really needs to stop. There is trillions of dollars of debt and with interest rates rising, more and more of the budget will be to service that debt. That is a zero sum game. We should not be spending more than we bring in and each year we bring in a record amount of cash to the Treasury. These are my reasons for generally supporting these "concessions". Please provide a point by point reasoning why these concessions are not good. mspart

What are the odds that the Ds use this at least once a week? So in general Mike, you are not supportive of any of these concessions? mspart

This is another good one. mspart

I like this one. mspart

It cost this: As has been reported, it will only take a single congressperson, acting in what is known as a Jeffersonian Motion, to move to remove the Speaker if he or she goes back on their word or policy agenda. A “Church” style committee will be convened to look into the weaponization of the FBI and other government organizations (presumably the CIA, the subject of the original Church Committee) against the American people. Term limits will be put up for a vote. Bills presented to Congress will be single subject, not omnibus with all the attendant earmarks, and there will be a 72-hour minimum period to read them. The Texas Border Plan will be put before Congress. From The Hill: “The four-pronged plan aims to ‘Complete Physical Border Infrastructure,’ ‘Fix Border Enforcement Policies,’ ‘Enforce our Laws in the Interior’ and ‘Target Cartels & Criminal Organizations.’” COVID mandates will be ended as will all funding for them, including so-called “emergency funding.” Budget bills would stop the endless increases in the debt ceiling and hold the Senate accountable for the same. I would have to say item 1 is not good, Item 3 is a no go, SCOTUS won't allow it. Has to be a Constitutional Amendment, not some law. Been through this already. Items 2, 4, and 5 are good. Item 6, I'm on the fence about that. Still lots of folks have been hurt by that downturn. Item 7 won't happen. There's the facts and my opinion about them. mspart

Actual video, funnier than the photos. Rogers got taken out quick. mspart

Well, now everyone can take a deep breath and revel in the fact that we have a speaker of the House and that all reps are now sworn in or will be shortly. Just takes a huge load off of my mind. mspart

I think that is probably true. Tough to see the grins and chuckles on the other side of the keyboard while typing. mspart