Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and Becomes a Terrorist
Good news! A Hollywood studio has announced they will remake of the 1939 film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. Boldly holding a mirror to society, Narrative Studios will retell Frank Capra’s story from an unjust era with a modern twist.
In this updated version, a newly elected congressman played by Jim Caviezel single-handedly and recklessly dares to disrupt the people’s business. He is a white narcissist and PDQ-Anon follower who stops half of Congress from working while the other half is on vacation.
He is rightly called a “terrorist” by a veteran Congressman Dan “Eyepatch” McCain of Texas, the people’s champion, who calls for stripping Smith of all his committee memberships and cafeteria privileges. “He shall not dine with us!” is the rally cry.
The media is obsessed with covering this one-man insurrection and country is transfixed on the saga. The story and vitriol around procedures and rules builds to a climax until equity is restored and democracy is saved by a scrappy orator from New York and his legendary alliteration in a finale that is sure to bring tears to the eyes and a patriotic lump in your throat.
FWIW:
Clearly a turn of phrase?
I can see how it could be used as a joke, but Crenshaw sounds like my bully cousin getting caught and saying “just kidding!” To avoid getting in trouble.
This guy is not to be trusted and should be PRIMARYED !!!!!
Just a turn of phrase ,
I suppose that when I get a fund-raising request from him, I can just reply that “terrorists don’t support RINOs”.
I don’t think anyone covered themselves in glory in the Republican Party in the vote for the Speaker of the House. Matt Gaetz, and others asked McCarthy for commitments. They avoided making their own commitments for a “yes” vote in return for receiving McCarthy commitments. I wouldn’t trust any of them with my wallet.
Is PDQ-Anon actually Peter Schickele? If so, I am all in.
Nation Devastated As Congress Resumes Functioning | Babylon Bee
The old, “I’m sorry if someone was offended” apology. Or no apology at all.
Who was it who said that he looks like a hit man in a porn movie?
That sounds like something red herring would say :p
It’s about at the 1 minute mark.
I really dislike those sleazy non-apology “apologies” that seem to be the rage nowadays. What they are really saying is, “I didn’t say anything wrong, but if you misunderstood what I said, I apologize for your feelings being hurt by your misunderstanding.”
He now mocks the people who defended him when he was being mocked.
Could not disagree more. I think it was one of the best outcomes that could have occurred. If implemented, these could be great reforms. Rather than allowing 15-20 members of the House to determine what occurs, the process will be much more open. If only 15-20 members are determining what’s going on, what’s the use of the other 415-420 House members? It was run as an oligarchy and had been for the better part of two decades.
It was a great good cop-bad cop performance. Charlie Brown McCarthy kept trying to kick the football, but it kept being pulled away. I enjoyed it.
He calls them terrorists, they call him McCain, not sure who should be more offended.
He looks like from the same mold as McCain. He probably takes it as a compliment.
Yeah, at one point he was on several different news shows complaining that the other side’s opposition was “a childish attempt at gaining attention.” So, he ran towards cameras to say other people were desperate for attention? That does seem McCainish.
Word on the street is that he taught that “One Tear. Left Eye, Go!” trick to Meaghan. But I haven’t been able to confirm that.
I’m not inclined to treat Crenshaw’s comment as being anything more than it was, not indicative of anything more significant, and appropriately walked back as an intemperate outburst. Along the lines of not attributing to malice what can be regarded as negligence, I see no reason to suddenly treat Crenshaw like a pariah because your preferred faction was on the receiving end of an intemperate rebuke.
The entire goat rodeo of electing a Speaker infuriated a lot people and there were a lot of condescending and insulting comments going back and forth (e.g., saying there was no practical difference between McCarthy and Pelosi, McCarthy was squatting in the Speaker’s office, etc.).
If you want to go down the path of auditing each public comment, the order in which they were stated, the import of specific words used, etc., be my guest but I don’t find it particularly enlightening, edifying or useful. I find all of this intramural squabbling tiresome, unhelpful, and a distraction.
Personally, I would prefer the caucus members act like adults and think strategically about what they can do while controlling one-half of one branch of government with a razor-thin majority, rather than starting out of the gate by hobbling their leadership.
Crenshaw is getting on my nerves. However, I have not heard of him betraying his principles out of petty political spite like McCain. He worked with Trump to get all the policies right. So big ups to him there. However, he seems McCainish with the media and that scares me. He does seem alot smarter than McCain though.
Used by moral midgets.