Posted on 01/07/2015 7:31:21 AM PST by Timber Rattler
The last time there was a speaker vote, Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) didn't vote for John A. Boehner, protesting against the Ohio Republican by voting for no one.
On Tuesday, he did vote for Boehner. And he had some not-so-nice things to say about the movement to try to defeat the top Republican.
Below is his full statement, which is remarkably blunt and the kind of thing that is rarely seen from a member of Congress. (Seriously, it's worth reading the whole thing.)
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Perhaps time to revive the Tyranny Response Teams of days past?
They're all talk, no fight.
Read the article. Can’t argue with his reasoning.
Screw ‘em.
Patriots best turn their backs on the parades of those who sing a song of FReedom but condone Tyranny and turn on their own.
Do not fall for their gimmicks, their consternation at their fellow reps., those who do recognize tyranny and do speak out against it, not rally around the dysfunctional leadership and ignore the plight of this nation..
You mean the reasoning that because he could not trust his "Conservative" colleagues, and that the Speaker's election should have been handled in November, he no choice but to vote for the devil?
Sorry, no sale.
Sorry, no sale.
Didn't say I Agreed with his decision, Just that his reasoning was sound. Sometimes when you know you are gonna lose, you need to do the right thing anyway.
“If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.”
-Winston Churchill-
I am considering calling my Rep. Hal “Robert Porker Byrd Jr.” Rogers and tell him I have changed to a liberal democrat voter and would that help him to represent me when he is considering his future votes. Hell being a liberal with the Republicans gets you farther than being a conservative period!
When you win a victory of historic proportions...it is insanity to immediately change leadership...
Rep. Mick Mulvaney claimed today that he voted with the group of conservatives two years ago to prevent Boehner from being Speaker. As best I can tell, he did no such thing. In fact, it appears to me that HE was one of the members who promised to vote against Boehner but at the last minute chose not to vote at all. The record would appear to contradict what he asserted. Check out 54 minutes into the link. As best I can tell, Mulvaney's name was called twice and he does not answer.
http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4520189/house-speaker-election-113th-congress
A very gifted obfuscator. He knew for at least 2 years that Boehner was playing for the other team. It reminds me of Rat city councils who screw up people’s lives, then tell them how much they need the Rats since their lives are so screwed up. The leadership void in congress has been your problem to fix Mr. Obfuscation (R-SC). If you weren’t busy trying to figure out how to contort your way into a Heritage score of 90 (without actually doing anything valuable), you might have known that.
You are absolutely correct. That is the slobbering, staring in the face, stepping on your foot, bull in the china shop that I can’t believe people still don’t see.
From what I understand, what’s called English is really Creole.
It’s too bad Nancy Pelosi doesn’t demagogue as hard for free markets as she does for killing babies.
That would be a good point if we haven’t been pointing out how terrible Boner was all these years. They all knew what Boner was up to, and could have done something.
But he’ll still get 60+ in 2016.
Maybe the win was for changing leadership. If the GOP does not get some conservatives in leadership I don’t see them getting the presidency in two years. If their is also not a conservative as the GOP nomination I don’t see them winning either.
A change of leadership is what is needed in my view point to solidify the GOP. Without it the GOP is done in the next election.
The Washington Post is not a credible source to use as information about conservatives but IF that is indeed the statement of Mulvaney they published, then it it shows Mulvaney is extremely duplicitous in his thinking and it shows he has been or is being ‘assimilated’ into the establishment mindset of compromising until you stand for nothing.
Again IF this is his statement, his offering as evidence of his conservative voting record shows the same old tired and worn defense of treachery to principle. He is selling out, he’s on that pathway.
Selling out in Washington DC happens and not much can be done about it except replace the infected member by voting in a fresh face.
Now Mulvaney has gone from the RSC to a new splinter group ostensibly to appease constituents that he angered with his Boehner vote and backstabbing of those who were courageous to stand against Boehner.
People such as Mulvaney need to be voted out and if that is the goal of the Washington Post they may get their wish.
Very good point. And now we see Mulvaney is headed for the new conservative splinter group:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3246617/posts
Hopefully, the new splinter group will grill him on his ‘statement’ before they decide to allow him to meet with them. I think he’s going there because he angered his constituents back home. Hopefully, his home district will vote this liar out of office in 2016.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.