Eric Cantor Given Total Control Of House In LATE NIGHT RULE CHANGE By GOP

[onenote]

93. Because running around misstating the facts and law doesn't do us any good

Do you think loudly proclaiming that it was illegal for the House to adopt the rule it adopted to govern its consideration of the CR is helpful when the Constitution clearly gives each House authority to make the rules that govern their proceedings?

Do you think that loudly proclaiming that the entire House didn't vote on that rule when it without a doubt did so is helpful?

I've made very clear that I think that the repubs tactics here are outrageous and would produce a very bad policy result. I've also made it clear that running around shouting "arrest them" is decidedly stupid.

Do you think that if there was the slightest basis for characterizing anything that the repubs have done here as "illegal" that someone like Alan Grayson would remain silent? Of course not. But Grayson has a greater understanding of history than some here do. He undoubtedly knows that the shoe sometimes is on the other foot. He also knows that saying what the repubs have done is illegal, is sedition, is treason would not be helpful if the President ever had to veto a CR or a debt ceiling bill (as Bill Clinton did in the mid-1990s and as President Obama has justifiably threatened to do (at least with respect to the CR).

Its called thinking about the consequences of what you are shouting. Such as: how would arresting anyone change anything. How would the House ever have a quorum to act (required by the Constitution). And that's just one of many "real world" questions that people ought to consider if they are looking for an effective way to respond to the repubs actions rather than engaging in silly fantasies.