Is anyone else as sick of seeing Sinema’s navel in her usually skin tight clothes as I am? I hope Arizonans give her plenty of time to gaze her own navel and give me a break from it in the next election.
6 Likes
There is no remorse on her part for killing kids (see my second post).
There is a sadistic streak in this woman and, whether we acknowledge it or not, the people funding her are even more sadistic.
Failure to focus or even mention that is malpractice.
What do her donors want?…or is all the cruelty and horror going down the Chuck Todd-ish hole of “that’s how the Game is played”?
13 Likes
On the other hand, how much “punishment” does an “official” censure carry? She clearly has decided she doesn’t need party support, so however misguided/crazy her thinking, what’s the actual penalty? As Josh pointed out in his editorial, she’s already toast, politically. Time to ignore her and focus on the midterms and see if Dems can somehow pick up a couple more Senate seats (nearly impossible, I know, but worth the effort) and hang on to the House.
10 Likes
Arizona Democrats Censure Sinema, thus cementing her claim to being a mavericky centrist independent thinker, aka, self-important dipshit.
7 Likes
Answers to the last questions of my previous post:
(1) Kids to die
(2) Yes
1 Like
Sinema has two choices: piss off Democrats or piss them off even more. If I were in her shoes I’d make it a point to stop pissing off Democrats.
6 Likes
It’s a good thing you provided context. My mind went in a very different direction before reading the added part…
1 Like
Yeah, she’s making Trump look selfish. 
6 Likes
Whatever. That would only work if she had any future in politics. She doesn’t.
5 Likes
How many judges were confirmed in 2021? How many do you want in 2022? There are two nominees to the USPS board currently hanging fire. Do you want to fire DeJoy?
18 Likes
Nope
1 Like
How will she retaliate? By not voting for stuff she says she’s for? We’re already there. How many repubs did she bring along in her quest for bipartisanship? Or does she want Biden to do the heavy lifting?
6 Likes
Yes, Sinema can make things worse and I’d rather she didn’t.
Sinema can join the Republicans if she chooses. I’d rather she voted for Democrat-chosen federal judges, for example.
8 Likes
No more judges confirmed, for one.
And no more of Biden’s ambassadors or other administration posts filled.
No chance of passing any parts of BBB or the voting rights legislation.
You haven’t thought this through, and it shows.
14 Likes
WhY wouLd I voTe for A mavericK democraT when I caN casT a vote for A reaL Republican?
10 Likes
Because of the risk that she’d switch parties (or, maybe more consistent with her delusions of maverickness, declare herself independent and caucus with Mitch’s treasonistas), you mean?
That is the major risk, and it’s been my main worry with her, too. But I’m starting to worry less about that, and to explain why, I offer these considerations:
-
The big legislative pushes appear to be pretty dead for the rest of the year anyway, thanks to her and Manchin.
-
Biden’s gotten a lot of confirmations through by now. (Gee, do you think there was a reason why Schumer was pushing those through so hard?)
-
If she’s inclined to switch parties, she might have done that anyway, censure or no censure.
-
If she does switch, and put (gag) Moscow Mitch back in the Majority Leader’s office, it might actually help the Dems in November. You know, by mitigating some of the bogus-but-real “you control both houses, so the dysfunction is entirely your fault” narrative. It might help to support the “what we really need is to elect more Dems to support Biden’s agenda” argument.
-
The Jan 6th investigation is in the House, and so Senate control doesn’t signify there. (Another GOP own-goal – they could have had a joint investigation, but they blocked it.)
So I dunno, but like I said, I’m less convinced now that a SineSwitch would be a complete disaster.
20 Likes
Well if she’s a maverick then she’ll vote for whoever she wants.
I think we shouldn’t fall so quickly into thinking that she’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing, she is who she is. Which someone who needs to communicate more, learn how to play on a team, and learn how dress to make a statement and not make everyone roll their eyes.
As for Joe he is now saying that the he’s negotiated version of BBB is not what he wants to vote on. Hun? I mean if you have principles stick with them, but you have to explain what they are. If you think you have a better then convince us.
3 Likes
This had to be done. Sinema gave Democrats no option because while we as a Party stand for many things - there’s hardly anything bigger than voting rights.
So this is a marker for anyone who says or thinks Democrats don’t get anything done or are weak and feckless. This says no. It’s not us, just two Senators, and if you help us vote in better Democrats, not just in Arizona, but Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida, etc., we will revisit this and get it done. Don’t make the mistake of tainting the entire Party with the deeds of just two members.
22 Likes
Yes. It suggests that Democrats never did control the Senate.
3 Likes
In Sinema’s dysfunctional brain, maintaining the filibuster is more important than voting rights and democracy itself. Unbelievably dysfunctional.
I don’t think she (or Manchin for that matter) really believe that. Because the filibuster has been set aside “just this once” numerous times to get something passed, including for some sort of funding bill just a few weeks ago.
So I don’t give them the benefit of any doubt. If they’re not willing to set aside the filibuster for voting rights, then they don’t want voting rights…for whatever reasons they have but don’t want to have to explain.
19 Likes