Republican Priorities

[Joe Guy]

Transgender Rep.-elect Sarah McBride calls GOP attacks 'an attempt to distract' from the issues


Rep.-elect Sarah McBride, D-Del., the first openly transgender person elected to serve in Congress, on Sunday called House Republicans’ moves to ban her from using women’s bathrooms in the Capitol “mean-spirited” and an “attempt to misdirect” from other policy priorities.

“I think we are all united that attempts to attack a vulnerable community are not only mean-spirited, but really an attempt to misdirect,” McBride told CBS News’ “Face the Nation.” “Every single time we hear the incoming administration or Republicans in Congress talk about any vulnerable group in this country, we have to be clear that it is an attempt to distract.”

She added, “It is an attempt to distract from what they are actually doing. Every single time, every single time we hear them say the word ‘trans,’ look what they’re doing with their right hand. Look at what they’re doing to pick the pocket of American workers, to fleece seniors by privatizing Social Security and Medicare,” McBride added.

In a separate interview Sunday, she also characterized the ongoing Republican moves to restrict where she can use the bathroom on Capitol Hill “a lot of noise.”

“Over the last two years, over the last two weeks, there’s certainly been a lot of noise around me, but I’ve remained focused,” McBride told MSNBC’s “The Weekend.”

She added that she didn’t run for her seat, where she’ll begin serving as a first-term congresswoman in January, to make waves.

“I didn’t run to be a first. I didn’t run to make history. I ran to serve this state that I love and to deliver for Delawareans,” McBride said.

Her comments come as Republicans have ramped up attacks against her in the last two weeks, with Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., sponsoring a resolution that would prohibit House members and staff from “using single-sex facilities other than those corresponding to their biological sex.”

On Wednesday, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., joined Mace, saying in a statement, “All single-sex facilities in the Capitol and House Office Buildings — such as restrooms, changing rooms, and locker rooms — are reserved for individuals of that biological sex.”

He added that “each Member office has its own private restroom, and unisex restrooms are available throughout the Capitol.”

On Sunday, Mace doubled down on her anti-trans rhetoric, telling Fox News, “So many women now today feel more brave and have more courage because I’ve been speaking out. They feel like they’re going to be supported.”

In the wake of Mace and Johnson’s statements, Democrats in both chambers of Congress have backed McBride, condemning Republicans for targeting her.

On Sunday, Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., blasted Mace as “disgusting and wrong,” telling CNN: “We have issues here in this country, and yet she’s worried about one member of Congress using the bathroom. Number one, I think her position is disgusting and wrong, but I also think that we have a lot more to worry about than where somebody goes to pee.”

During Thursday’s White House press briefing, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters that President Joe Biden is “very proud of” McBride and added: “What [McBride] said is, ‘I’m not here to fight about bathrooms. I’m here to fight for Delawareans and to bring down costs facing families.’ And we agree with her.”

And on Tuesday, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries accused House Republicans of “bullying” McBride.

“This incoming small House Republican Conference majority is beginning to transition to the new Congress by bullying a member of Congress,” Jeffries told reporters.

He added: “This is what we’re doing? This is the lesson that you’ve drawn from the election in November? This is your priority, that you want to bully a member of Congress, as opposed to welcoming her to join this body so all of us can work together to get things done and deliver real results for the American people.”

source

It sure is great knowing that our representatives in DC are looking out for us.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Number one, I think her position is disgusting and wrong, but I also think that we have a lot more to worry about than where somebody goes to pee.”

I agree. But of course that could equally be said of Mace or Duckworth.

The point of my earlier screed is exactly that - the "I think" relativity that divides America. Not on this issue alone - but on almost all issues. Whose "I think" outweighs the other "I think" and why?

[Big RR]

I don't see your point Meade; Congress has a job to do in serving the public and enacting legislation to accomplish those purposes. Certainly one can use objective means to see what needs to be done, and determining what restroom someone uses in the House does not cross this threshold (anymore than whether someone pee standing up or sitting down or how many sheets of toilet paper someone uses does). If they were doing what they needed to do--e.g.enacting a budget and ensuring the finds are there to meet it, perhaps we could address what "I think" issues are important, but we are nowhere near that--and I doubt any thinking person would disagree.

Of course, there are some who would prefer to bluster about these issues rather than do the job they were elected to do, but I would bet they know exactly what they are doing, and what they should be doing.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Certainly one can use objective means to see what needs to be done, and determining what restroom someone uses in the House does not cross this threshold

One can and this issue may not cross this threshold. Says who? Why are your thoughts more righteous than what Person X thinks? That be some of that philosophistical stuff there, bro.

Congress has a job to do in serving the public and enacting legislation to accomplish those purposes

True enough but it appears some think that "serving the public" means satisfying the millions of Person Xs who voted red.

I doubt that this grandstanding proposal will pass - it should not pass. But America long ago sold out to relative truth thinking and now here comes the inevitable kickback no matter how ridiculous. Discarding the ground of absolute truth brings consequences. Division being foremost and that was the point.

[Big RR]

One can and this issue may not cross this threshold. Says who? Why are your thoughts more righteous than what Person X thinks? That be some of that philosophistical stuff there, bro.

I have not said anything resembling that; only that Congress has practical responsibilities that outweigh who uses what bathroom in their offices (FWIW, who gets what office is the same sort of thing); do your job first and then address these issues of you choose.

True enough but it appears some think that "serving the public" means satisfying the millions of Person Xs who voted red.

I recall a line from The Right Stuff--no bucks, no Buck Rogers. Renege on your duties and rive the country into bankruptcy and who uses what bathroom won't be a worry--you won't have water to flush the toilets.

FWIW, I can think of a lot of other issues that I'd like to see discussed, but I'll gladly push them aside to get a budget and adequate funding.

[MajGenl.Meade]

only that Congress has practical responsibilities that outweigh who uses what bathroom in their offices (FWIW, who gets what office is the same sort of thing); do your job first and then address these issues if you choose.

Again, sez you. What makes you right and anyone else wrong? You don't want to acknowledge (and nor would I in your position) that what you have said before and above is your opinion which has no greater (and no lesser) value than that stupid Republican woman and her toilet bill. We have been reduced to battling opinions altho' you would much prefer (as would I) some sane facts.

I didn't think this would become a discussion - it's just a fact that this is where America is now. One opinion, right or wrong, is as good as another - to those who hold those opinions. And in other words, the majority opinion is going to insist on its own righteousness - hence Trump won election. Despite being deplorable

[Bicycle Bill]

This representative should bring a big jug onto the floor of the House and use it at her desk (after erecting a small privacy screen, of course).   And if the Speaker calls her down for her breach of decorum, she should just claim she is at a loss to know just where she may go to relieve herself.

-"BB"-

[MajGenl.Meade]

This representative should bring a big jug onto the floor of the House and use it at her desk (after erecting a small privacy screen, of course).   And if the Speaker calls her down for her breach of decorum, she should just claim she is at a loss to know just where she may go to relieve herself.

Speaking of full o' . . . Bill, if you read the article you'll see that the Speaker claims that each Member (for want of a better word) has an office with a private loo and there are unisex loos throughout the building. That doesn't excuse the juvenile vindictiveness and timing of this 'rule' but it does make your scatological remarks look equally as jejune.

[Big RR]

OK Meade--if you can explain to me how where a member of Congress goes to the bathroom is of ANY consequence to any person other than the members of that body (and their staff), I will concede your position. But I do not see how it affects anyone at all other than that you say have their "opinion".

[Bicycle Bill]

... the Speaker claims that each Member (for want of a better word) has an office with a private loo and there are unisex loos throughout the building.

As for the private office, you ARE aware that only the Congressional leadership has offices inside the Capitol Building itself?   As for the unisex loos, they may not be the most convenient, possibly requiring the congress-critter in question to pass by several facilities that are NOT unisex but would be off-limits if this petty bit of gamesmanship is allowed to stand.

-"BB"-

[MajGenl.Meade]

... the Speaker claims that each Member (for want of a better word) has an office with a private loo and there are unisex loos throughout the building.

As for the private office, you ARE aware that only the Congressional leadership has offices inside the Capitol Building itself?   As for the unisex loos, they may not be the most convenient, possibly requiring the congress-critter in question to pass by several facilities that are NOT unisex but would be off-limits if this petty bit of gamesmanship is allowed to stand.

Yes. Hence "the Speaker claims"

[MajGenl.Meade]

OK Meade--if you can explain to me how where a member of Congress goes to the bathroom is of ANY consequence to any person other than the members of that body (and their staff), I will concede your position. But I do not see how it affects anyone at all other than that you say have their "opinion".

Why have you offered any opinion at all on the entire matter if the only people with a right to be concerned about it are members of Congress (and their staff)? And if the consequence is of no significance to you?

And yet somehow you decreed the order of importance of Congressional duties and responsibilities such that bathroom matters could only be of concern after all other concerns had been satisfied. (By which you mean 'never').

As for explanation . . . I claimed no such thing (or perhaps 'things' since your second sentence is in need of proof-reading).
My position is that a sufficient number of Americans are pissed off to overcome rational repugnance to a creature such as Trump and that Democrats dismiss the opinions of those 'normal' Americans as being aberrant. Hence they lost and the people polled pretended it was the economy that swayed them - not the leftist insistence on rubbing their faces in abnormal social engineering. Being 'normal' is not fashionable these days. Relative truth is all.

I don't think that congress should be banning transgender people from toilets. (See - words. Toilet. Not bathroom - nobody is bathing in there). One hopes.

[Big RR]

OK, I guess there's no use in continuing this discussion. As I understand your point, you believe that people's opinions about a thing that doesn't affect them in the least should be treated the same as the opinions of others about issues that may have a direct affect on their lives and the state of the country, I do not. There's no real middle ground there. I'll declare the impasse and stop negotiations.

[datsunaholic]

OK, I guess there's no use in continuing this discussion. As I understand your point, you believe that people's opinions about a thing that doesn't affect them in the least should be treated the same as the opinions of others about issues that may have a direct affect on their lives and the state of the country, I do not. There's no real middle ground there. I'll declare the impasse and stop negotiations.

You may believe that someone's opinion on something that doesn't affect them shouldn't be treated the same, but here's a problem:

Their votes count the same.

And that's why we lost the election.

We might discount someone's opinions as being racist, bigoted, or simply uninformed/misinformed, but in the end their votes still count the same. What's easier- changing someone's deeply held opinions, or getting those you disagree with to not vote?

Republicans have figured out the latter.

[Big RR]

Point taken Datsun, but I am not sure what votes are being sought here; we are talking about what the priorities in Congress should be. I guess the argument could be made that members of Congress should prioritize catering to their base by enacting silly legislation that benefits no one instead of doing the job they are there to do, but I can't agree, nor do I think the two positions are equivalent opinions as Meade suggests.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Point taken Datsun, but I am not sure what votes are being sought here; we are talking about what the priorities in Congress should be. I guess the argument could be made that members of Congress should prioritize catering to their base by enacting silly legislation that benefits no one instead of and doing the job they are there to do, but I can't agree, nor do I think the two positions are equivalent opinions as Meade suggests.

FTFY

The votes being sought are the votes of all the people who voted XYZ into local/State/Federal office and who XYZ wants to vote for him/her again. It's called "holding on to power" and possibly reaching higher office. Why is this rocket science?

Members of Congress DO prioritize catering to their base by enacting (or vocalizing support for) legislation that their base believes to be important AND doing the job they are there to do as they understand the wishes of their base.

You believe your opinions are objectively correct and contrary opinions are incorrect.
In a shocking reversal, "they" believe that their opinions are correct and don't give a damn for your opinions.

This is the human condition. We all think we are correct. Of course you (and I) think our own opinions are more worthy. Doesn't everybody?

No one is suggesting an equality of VALUE in opinions. I don't expect you to agree to that and more than do I. But the Dems have been catering to an old-model base - and times have changed. You see it in their relentless courting of marginal groups and kowtowing to political correctness.

Dats wrote: "We might discount someone's opinions as being racist, bigoted, or simply uninformed/misinformed". Here's news: it ain't 'we might' it is "we have been". I include myself. But I know many of those people and they are none of those things - they are pissed off with being pissed on by know-it-alls (like me). They don't like being despised. And they want their to get their own back.

[Big RR]

You believe your opinions are objectively correct and contrary opinions are incorrect.

Please Meade, what "opinion" am I expressing? The fact that Congress has critical legislation that they must attend to, and that failure to do so can affect us all? That is hardly an opinion--or do you believe there is no such critical legislation that Congress needs to address? I have not expressed any opinion on the issues that are part of this critical legislation as that is not part of this discussion (and FWIW, I have strong opinions about those issues).

Yes, politicians on all sides of the spectrum do cater to their base and enact legislation or EOs the others find objectionable, but as my mom used to tell me, you can't go out to play until you finish your (home)work, and Congress members shouldn't play the kowtow game before they finish their work. Otherwise, we will all be affected, and that is a fact.

And, I know I said I wouldn't keep it going, but your lured me out, This will be my last post on the subject.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Please Meade, what "opinion" am I expressing? The fact that Congress has critical legislation that they must attend to, and that failure to do so can affect us all?

Right on, Big RR! But that wasn't what you expressed, was it?

Congress has a job to do in serving the public and enacting legislation to accomplish those purposes. Certainly one can use objective means to see what needs to be done, and determining what restroom someone uses in the House does not cross this threshold

That's what you wrote, opining that restroom use in the House has no public service component and nor does enacting legislation to accomplish that purpose. It doesn't matter how much I agree with you there; other people do not agree.

And unless the Dems figure out how to engage and handle those folks, then our future looks grim. That's the point. Not an empty debate about the equivalence of two opposite opinions. They ain't equally valid or true or worthwhile (in my opinion). But they generate votes, very angry votes.

I can't be clearer than this from earlier on:

I didn't think this would become a discussion - it's just a fact that this is where America is now. One opinion, right or wrong, is as good as another - to those who hold those opinions. And in other words, the majority opinion is going to insist on its own righteousness - hence Trump won election. Despite being deplorable

[datsunaholic]

The fact is that many Republicans, particularly MAGA ones, are voted in by single issue voters. So to KEEP those voters, they propose legislation to cater to that base.

One of those issues is transgender rights- and the MAGA crowd believe that transgender folks do not deserve to be recognized. They believe anyone who is transgender is mentally ill at best and at the other end believe they are perverts who should be jailed (or worse). Hence all the various legislation recently to try to force transgender folks to conform to the gender they were assigned at birth.

It's pandering to their base- "Look at me, I'm doing what you wanted me to do".

And as Sarah McBride said, it's a distraction. Because Transgender issues are a key part of the Liberal platform, having the Liberal legislators focused on fighting the bathroom bill takes the focus off of the Republicans selling off the country to the highest bidder.

[Big RR]

having the Liberal legislators focused on fighting the bathroom bill takes the focus off of the Republicans selling off the country to the highest bidder

Or even beginning to attend to the work that lies before congress.