Thanks for the smile at the end of your column with the story about Senator Harris. For a brief moment the feeling of doom and gloom I have with republicans in charge left me!
It’s back now. We are doomed if Senate republicans refuse to find their moral compass and their spines. I have no hope that will happen in the House. And the White House? Yeah, right.
Meh. We know who Grassley is and what to expect. Ditto Ernst. Though she might be miffed she didn’t get a leadership position, but all the more reason to suck up.
Our senators are no longer leaders. They are political cowards. Thank you for continuing to shine a light on that which Iowans need to pay attention, Barry.
Another thing we must call out and reject is the Iowa Republicans insufferable smear campaign they have waged against Ann Selzer. Trump and his minions have even said she should be investigated and so naturally she is receiving threats. Their entire governing strategy seems to be creating fear and lies. It is deplorable.
They have been attacking the press since Nixon lost his California gubernatorial race in 1962, as well as science, education, history, etc. She does not deserve the smears, but at least she is in good company.
The smears, BTW, tell us a lot more about them than about her.
Yup. Grassley, however, wasn’t silent at first. He was on board with ignoring the House Ethics Committee report until the ground started shifting out from under Gaetz, which is when Grassley decided to channel Howard Cosell.
I was honored to work on the Fred Harris Campaign in Polk County under the guidance of Glenn and Florence Buhr. It was a matter of pride and learning of Populism.
Jim Hightower was Fred's campaign manager. He was a remarkable boss who went on to do great things in Texas.
Great stuff, Barry. I found it ironic you mentioned "the damage...to the Republican brand." Is it possible to damage something that's already extinct? Edsel and Blockbuster come to mind. The R brand has been completely taken over by MAGA. Perhaps a new re-branding is in the works. They'll need to replace the elephant mascot with a new one. Any ideas? Sheep? Lemmings?
Worth repeating. "Iowans have every right to expect that their senators will not go silent or vague in order to make themselves purposely misunderstood."
Did opponents, including D's, choose the correct strategy of staying out of the Gaetz debate?
Anti-Gaetz groups and Democrats largely avoided making Matt Gaetz's actions a major public campaign, perhaps based on whatever temporary or perceived success achieved on Republican disarray during the R House speakership crisis. This allowed internal GOP conflicts to play out naturally without direct partisan play.
But, was it a good strategy in the long run to let Republicans handle the Gaetz? I am thinking of upcoming battles over appointments and setting the groundwork for future exercise as a minority party to be reckoned with-think McConnell) However, for future battles over nominees or governance issues, groups who will oppose Trump's nominees, including Democrats, need a more proactive strategy, emphasizing shared themes like ethics, competence, and eventual specific weakness as a government with weak leaders all contributing to economic decline. A combination of these or other themes can impact public perception and prevent further normalization of problematic appointments, if not policies like no vaccinations, sharing military secrets with Russia or Syria, or initial steps to privatization of social security and medicare.
I am confident Ds would have fully engaged once the new Congress convenes in January. There was no real need for them to do so at this point as there was nothing they could do, officially, until the confirmation process began
Also, Ds engaging at this point would have been likely to cause Rs to rally around Gaetz and Trump.
This was, at this point, really a problem for Rs to solve - and if they had failed to do that - Ds cleared the stage for a full vie for Americans to see them failing.
One of my former bosses, a Senator told me once, “Never cross the street to to interrupt your opponents when they are having a big fight with themselves. I think that applied here, as the old Congress runs out.
There are still a number of nominees who should be clearly unacceptable, that the new Congress will need to confirm and reject. I am confident Ds will be fully involved in that.
BTW, if the Trump was as smart as he thinks he is, he wouldn’t have announce all these nominees so early. He just gave Ds and other opponents an extra month to research their background and compile their weaknesses and vulnerabilities - which is actually good for America, though I’m sure that was never his intent.
Very interesting points. I think of the limited organized effort to start influencing Grassley and Ernst. Your points are well made; at the same time, I do not believe we can wait on pressuring our Senators.
Oh, I agree with you on Grassley & Ernst. Absolutely. No need to hold back there, especially because they failed the first test on the House Ethics Committee report. They need to hear from Iowans who rightfully find some of the other nominees utter unacceptable.
Thanks for the smile at the end of your column with the story about Senator Harris. For a brief moment the feeling of doom and gloom I have with republicans in charge left me!
It’s back now. We are doomed if Senate republicans refuse to find their moral compass and their spines. I have no hope that will happen in the House. And the White House? Yeah, right.
I’m glad you enjoyed that,Kathi. Senator Harris was a pretty colorful character who really had a way with words.
Meh. We know who Grassley is and what to expect. Ditto Ernst. Though she might be miffed she didn’t get a leadership position, but all the more reason to suck up.
Apparently Joni is still hanging with the boys around MaraLago hoping her leader will pick her for something. Surprisingly (to me) absent is B. Bird.
I noted the Son of Iowa's former Governor, Eric, was also at Mar-a-Largo. So the Branstads are continuing their 'grift'.
Our senators are no longer leaders. They are political cowards. Thank you for continuing to shine a light on that which Iowans need to pay attention, Barry.
Another thing we must call out and reject is the Iowa Republicans insufferable smear campaign they have waged against Ann Selzer. Trump and his minions have even said she should be investigated and so naturally she is receiving threats. Their entire governing strategy seems to be creating fear and lies. It is deplorable.
They have been attacking the press since Nixon lost his California gubernatorial race in 1962, as well as science, education, history, etc. She does not deserve the smears, but at least she is in good company.
The smears, BTW, tell us a lot more about them than about her.
Where were Grassley and Ernst?
Silence is complicity.
Yup. Grassley, however, wasn’t silent at first. He was on board with ignoring the House Ethics Committee report until the ground started shifting out from under Gaetz, which is when Grassley decided to channel Howard Cosell.
I was honored to work on the Fred Harris Campaign in Polk County under the guidance of Glenn and Florence Buhr. It was a matter of pride and learning of Populism.
Jim Hightower was Fred's campaign manager. He was a remarkable boss who went on to do great things in Texas.
Great stuff, Barry. I found it ironic you mentioned "the damage...to the Republican brand." Is it possible to damage something that's already extinct? Edsel and Blockbuster come to mind. The R brand has been completely taken over by MAGA. Perhaps a new re-branding is in the works. They'll need to replace the elephant mascot with a new one. Any ideas? Sheep? Lemmings?
Worth repeating. "Iowans have every right to expect that their senators will not go silent or vague in order to make themselves purposely misunderstood."
Did opponents, including D's, choose the correct strategy of staying out of the Gaetz debate?
Anti-Gaetz groups and Democrats largely avoided making Matt Gaetz's actions a major public campaign, perhaps based on whatever temporary or perceived success achieved on Republican disarray during the R House speakership crisis. This allowed internal GOP conflicts to play out naturally without direct partisan play.
But, was it a good strategy in the long run to let Republicans handle the Gaetz? I am thinking of upcoming battles over appointments and setting the groundwork for future exercise as a minority party to be reckoned with-think McConnell) However, for future battles over nominees or governance issues, groups who will oppose Trump's nominees, including Democrats, need a more proactive strategy, emphasizing shared themes like ethics, competence, and eventual specific weakness as a government with weak leaders all contributing to economic decline. A combination of these or other themes can impact public perception and prevent further normalization of problematic appointments, if not policies like no vaccinations, sharing military secrets with Russia or Syria, or initial steps to privatization of social security and medicare.
I am confident Ds would have fully engaged once the new Congress convenes in January. There was no real need for them to do so at this point as there was nothing they could do, officially, until the confirmation process began
Also, Ds engaging at this point would have been likely to cause Rs to rally around Gaetz and Trump.
This was, at this point, really a problem for Rs to solve - and if they had failed to do that - Ds cleared the stage for a full vie for Americans to see them failing.
One of my former bosses, a Senator told me once, “Never cross the street to to interrupt your opponents when they are having a big fight with themselves. I think that applied here, as the old Congress runs out.
There are still a number of nominees who should be clearly unacceptable, that the new Congress will need to confirm and reject. I am confident Ds will be fully involved in that.
BTW, if the Trump was as smart as he thinks he is, he wouldn’t have announce all these nominees so early. He just gave Ds and other opponents an extra month to research their background and compile their weaknesses and vulnerabilities - which is actually good for America, though I’m sure that was never his intent.
Very interesting points. I think of the limited organized effort to start influencing Grassley and Ernst. Your points are well made; at the same time, I do not believe we can wait on pressuring our Senators.
Oh, I agree with you on Grassley & Ernst. Absolutely. No need to hold back there, especially because they failed the first test on the House Ethics Committee report. They need to hear from Iowans who rightfully find some of the other nominees utter unacceptable.