<The showdown between Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) and President Joe Biden is coming up as the debt ceiling and budget battles approach. Biden released his budget publicly, but the Republicans, thus far, have no plan of their own.

"Separately, as you and I discussed earlier, I look forward to talking with you about our Nation’s economic and fiscal future,” Biden said in a letter to McCarthy. “But for that conversation to be productive, we should both tell the American people what we are for.”

It's been over a month since Biden released his budget. McCarthy and his allies have only attacked Biden's budget.

According to those that have seen McCarthy's plan, the Republicans claim there are "loopholes" that are allowing people to buy things they don't like. The reality is that SNAP benefits make up just 1.9 percent of the federal budget, said the Center for Economic and Policy Research. It helps elderly seniors, people with disabilities, and families with children, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities explained. "Children under age 18 constitute nearly half (44 percent) of all SNAP participants."

Politico reported Sunday that McCarthy's latest idea is to slash food aid to poor families, including children. Still, it's not sitting well with Republican colleagues who are likely aware of the inflated costs around food.

“I’m sure it won’t be easy,” Politico cited Sen. John Thune (SD), who explained his party will get a second bite at the apple later in 2023 during the fight over the farm bill.

The report also cited a GOP Senate aide, who was granted anonymity so that they could be less diplomatic: "I mean, Godspeed. Get what you can. We’re going to live in reality over here."

Sen. John Boozman (R-AR), the top GOP official on the Senate Agriculture Committee, told the site that he doesn't think something like that would make it through a 60-vote filibuster-proof majority. But he also said that he doesn't think it would make it through McCarthy's House either, given the narrow margins.

In a country with an open fight over forced birth, Republicans are being criticized for making people have children have children they can't afford and then ripping away any assistance for the child. In some cases, the women forced to give birth aren't making it, leaving behind a single-income family.

"Maternal mortality rose by 40 percent at the height of the pandemic, according to new data released by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention," said the BBC.

The problem that House Republicans are facing is that the budget is heavy with things that people like, such as Social Security, healthcare, the military, veterans, transportation and education. Anything not mentioned in those categories is less than one percent of the federal spending, as displayed in the chart from the U.S. Treasury Department below.>

Attorney: Mr Jordan, what can you tell us regarding measures you undertook to protect the well-being of OSU students, once you learnt of the sexual abuse?

Jordan: I, uh, uh.....

A: Let's move on for now; how about discussing the crime rate in Columbus?

J: Lemme see....I got nothing to say....

<During a panel discussion on MSNBC early Sunday morning, one political analyst claimed House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-OH) may be faced with Democrats bringing up sordid details from the Ohio Republican's personal life and crime rates in his home state during his Monday hearing on Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

On Monday, Jordan will take his show on the road to New York City for a hearing aimed at Bragg, accusing him of "pro-crime, anti-victim policies."

Speaking with Ayman Mohyeldin, political analyst Matthew Dowd claimed Jordan's attack on Bragg, with Democrats primed to push back, will open the door to everything Jordan-related.

And that could include accusations the Ohio lawmaker witnessed sexual assault and kept quiet about it when he was a wrestling coach at Ohio State.

According to Dowd, Democrats will highlight the crime rates in Jordan's Ohio when he tries to paint New York City as crime-ridden and then tie that to Bragg.

"I think your point leading into this, the facts said in this (are that) not only does Columbus have three times the crime rate that New York City has. The actual hometown where Jim Jordan is from has a higher crime rate a small town has a higher crime rate than New York City and of course that eight of the top ten crime rate states in America are red states," he explained.

"And, the other thing, I'll just add: if he really wanted to find out answers to the unanswered questions about crime, then hold it on the Ohio State University campus and ask about the sexual abuse scandals that occurred while he was the wrestling coach," he continued. "That would be a more formal and more interesting thing to find out undiscovered information.>

<What's the published source of this game?>

You and I know the MO, but each encounter has its own context.

And who knows, perhaps a miracle will occur, every buzzard has its day:

https://youtu.be/Ud74aD2KFuE?t=41

<Everyone lies. It’s a part of life, whether for better or for worse. Some people find peace in white lies and don’t feel bad about occasionally avoiding the truth to spare a loved one’s feelings. Others, however, see lying, even major lies, as something completely inconsequential.

Pathological lying goes far beyond the standard lies most people tell. Pathological liars lie about all kinds of things, big and small, for seemingly no reason whatsoever. Individuals with this personality trait may lie about innocuous things, like weekend plans, or larger topics, like past experiences, work, schooling or relationships. This may seem like nothing more than an obnoxious personality trait — and in some cases, it is — but lying to this level can also be a symptom of a larger problem. When narcissistic pathological lying begins to interfere with someone’s personal life or the lives of those around them, it may be time to consider a conversation with a therapist or other trained mental health professional.

Defining Pathological Lying

Pathological lying is a behavior pattern in which individuals lie chronically or compulsively. Sometimes referred to as mythomania or pseudologia fantastica, pathological lying generally manifests as lying for lying’s sake. In some cases, individuals may lie to make themselves look better, but in others, they may have no good reason to lie or don’t gain anything from the act of lying. Being friends or family members of a pathological liar can be very frustrating, as it’s hard to tell what’s a lie and what isn’t or when a liar can be trusted.

There may be biological drivers behind pathological lying. One study found that central nervous system behavior may influence a propensity for lying, and another found evidence of lying due to an imbalance in the hormone-cortisol ratio. However, due to the differences in the nature of lying and the purposes of lying from one individual to another, there’s not always clear logic behind when or why pathological lying occurs.

Mental Health Disorders

Mental health disorders can and do play a role in pathological lying and may be a contributing factor. In many instances, getting a diagnosis can be the first step to addressing chronic lying.

Determining the difference between lying for social or personal reasons and lying due to mental illness can be a challenge. However, there are often differences in the manifestation of lying in those with mental illnesses versus those who lie for other reasons. For example, there are links between mental illness and believing your own lies; liars with other motivations often don’t believe what they’re saying.

Some of the mental health disorders that cause or contribute to pathological lying include:

Narcissistic Personality Disorder: Also called NPD, narcissistic personality disorder manifests as arrogant and self-centered behavior with little regard for other people’s feelings. Narcissistic pathological liars may lie for attention, to make themselves feel better, to feel superior to others or to manipulate others for the purposes of self-gain.

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder: Obsessive compulsive disorder, or OCD, is a mental disorder that features intrusive thoughts and feelings, or obsessions, and a strong urge to perform certain behaviors, or compulsions. In some cases, there are ties between OCD and compulsive lying. Lying can be a true compulsion in a person with OCD experiences, or it can be a negative coping method.

Anxiety Disorders: Anxiety can manifest in numerous ways, from acute episodes to more generalized anxiety. While pathological lying isn’t a defining feature of anxiety as it is with other disorders, such as NPD, anxiety and compulsive lying can sometimes go hand in hand. People with anxiety disorders may lie to protect themselves from anxiety triggers or to handle things like a fear of rejection.

Antisocial Personality Disorder: Antisocial personality disorder is a serious diagnosis that often involves manipulation and cruelty toward others for the sake of personal amusement. It is often associated with psychopathy. Those with APD might compulsively lie to manipulate the people around them, hurt others’ feelings or otherwise cause harm....>

Morezacomin....

<....Other Reasons for Pathological Lying

While pathological lying can be linked to mental health disorders, it isn’t always. There are numerous other reasons why people may lie with abandon, including:

Insecurity: Some people feel very insecure about who they are and might lie in an effort to make themselves feel better or inflate their own sense of self-worth. Lying may also be a defense mechanism to prevent ridicule or social exclusion. Lying under these circumstances is often quite transparent.

Social status: For those who value social status, lying may be a way to maintain a reputation. For example, communities focused on looks or financial status may look down on behaviors they perceive as lesser. Participants in these kinds of communities, like country clubs or prestigious social organizations, may lie to fit in with their desired peers.

Humor: Though less common than other reasons, some people may lie often because they find it funny. They may not understand the frustrations that come with being lied to or may believe their lies are so egregious that no one would believe them.

<Wrong as usual. The Romantic Age of Chess was over before Savielly Tartakover ever pushed a pawn. Didn't you know that Tartakover was a hypermodernist?

Don't fret. We're used to it. Nobody pays much attention to such jabberwocky, but I'm a reader for accuracy. It's my attitude, my edge. You wouldn't understand the need for accuracy.

Besides, you'll use it as an excuse to post more jabberwocky seven or eight times on this page. We all know how you operate.>

<pervicious made his own point: <some posters here get shut down by me, in one big hurry--I have less than <no tolerance> for that.>

There's that word tolerance again. It's a hard pill to swallow for liberals.>

<Move to tamp down controversy fails to satisfy either side.

If you've even glanced at the internet over the last few weeks, you've probably seen videos of people shooting at or bulldozing unopened cans and bottles of Bud Lite beer. The classic libation isn't part of a hot new TikTok trend--it's the target of a conservative backlash.

The outrage, whether real or manufactured, comes over a single can of Bud Light sent to transgender Tik-Tok star Dylan Mulvaney on April 1st to commemorate the one-year marker since she’d come out, documenting her experiences transitioning in her "Days of Girlhood" series.

The backlash has mostly consisted of "anti-woke" posts on social media showing angry consumers destroying Bud Light products they had presumably purchased. But as news reports opposing the single-can collaboration grew, reactions became as serious as a bomb threat sent to Budweiser's Van Nuys, California factory.

In recent years, right wing groups have targeted the trans community as a way to boost fundraising and re-energize their base following the failure to block gay marriage, the New York Times noted.

In an attempt to tamp down the outcry, Anheuser-Busch (BUD) - Get Free Report, the maker of Budweiser products, released a statement on Friday, April 14th saying that the company “never intended to be part of a discussion that divides people.”

The company’s CEO Brendan Whitworth mentioned the importance of the values upon which America was founded: freedom, hard work, and respect for one another.” The statement reads as neither an apology for the collaboration nor a commitment to stand with the LGBTQ community. The leader does, however, say that he will “continue to work tirelessly to bring great beers to consumers across our nation.”>

<After 100 days in control, House Republicans have not reached consensus on how they will handle a vote on raising the debt ceiling — a critical piece of legislation that, if not passed, has global economic implications. They have not agreed on what their budget should, or should not, include, with various factions of the conference preparing their own versions. They are once again uncertain about when to vote on a major midterm promise — border security legislation — after not being able to secure support for its passage. And behind all of these public debates, skepticism and distrust is growing among GOP leaders.

The growing rancor and lack of progress on major legislation sets the stage for months of tumult ahead for House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), who has struggled to shepherd his narrowly divided conference as both moderate and extreme GOP members seek to leverage their power in the party’s four-vote majority. The coming battles could have profound effects on the U.S. economy as well as on the 2024 election, as House Republicans pursue numerous right-wing policies that could influence races for Congress and the White House.

McCarthy narrowly won approval to take the gavel after a bruising days-long fight in January and has seen other internal issues erupt into the public eye over committee assignments, stalled votes and increasing mistrust among leaders.

“Everybody is going to be looking at each other much more suspiciously now,” said a Republican aide who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal party dynamics. “It’s going to be much harder to do things.”

House Republicans have had some success, pushing through several bills that put Democrats on the record and were signed into law by President Biden, including those to declassify information pertaining to covid-19, end the covid national emergency and block a local D.C. crime bill from going into effect.

But Republicans’ first 100 days in the majority have been comparatively less productive than some previous Congresses. They have so far passed only a few of their top priorities, including an energy bill and voting to rescind money for IRS staffing — neither of which will be voted on in a Democratic-controlled Senate. Republicans point to the protracted speaker’s fight and slow organizing of the Congress to explain the sluggish start on the legislative front.

For his part, McCarthy has received accolades across the conference for his management style, including from the staunchly conservative group that almost thwarted his chance to take the speaker’s gavel. And he has spent time working to educate new members about fiscal issues and secure buy-in across the conference for the impending battles ahead. But the unity seemed fragile after a New York Times story last week reported McCarthy’s lack of confidence in some of his deputies. That renewed anxiety within his caucus about tackling the upcoming agenda amid such divisions.

In a news conference Monday, McCarthy made no mention of the internal conflicts and instead touted House Republicans’ achievements in the first 100 days, saying they will “move to make the fiscal house of America more secure by passing a debt ceiling.”

McCarthy has now taken a key aspect of the budget process into his own hands. He is devising a bill that would lift the debt limit for one year and propose up to $2 trillion in budget cuts over a decade. While the bill is based on the areas that have the most consensus within the conference, it’s still unclear if it — or any proposal — can gain the support of all 218 Republicans.

Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.), a conservative who has been critical of McCarthy in the past, said that “the speaker has done a really good job of holding the conference together.”

“But again, as you know, some of the heavier lift is still to come.”

How Republicans got here

It was an unusual sight inside the Capitol last month. Huddled over pizza in a ceremonial office, six House Republicans from disparate ideological factions boasted to reporters that they were setting aside their policy disagreements as they head into an expected collision with the White House over fiscal issues.

It was an attempt to portray a united front after a difficult launch for the new GOP majority that has already confronted some significant challenges. But Republicans admit the path ahead is treacherous....>

<....The most consequential issue is the debt ceiling, which could upend global economic stability if not addressed as soon as June 5, the date the Treasury Department has said the United States will reach its debt limit. Biden has demanded Congress lift the limit with no strings attached, while House Republicans are demanding major spending cuts in exchange.

Additionally, some in the conference are signaling a willingness to shut down the government if the House and the Senate can’t approve 12 individual funding bills — a feat both chambers haven’t achieved in more than 25 years.

Knowing his slim majority could derail negotiations on key policy issues at any moment, McCarthy prioritized bridging internal divides in the early days of the majority. To do that, he and his deputies have provided more avenues for lawmakers to express their opinions. More members are included at the leadership table. They’ve changed House rules to allow lawmakers a final opportunity to amend bills on the floor.

Underscoring the challenges of a new majority, however, leaders are routinely holding educational roundtables so members — some of whom have never held any elected office before and more than half of whom have never been in the House majority — understand that their redline demands have a higher likelihood of derailing good-faith negotiations than becoming law.

In February, hours before McCarthy met with Biden to discuss the debt ceiling and the GOP’s desire to rein in spending, the speaker convened a conference-wide debt-limit “boot camp” to educate members about the consequences of a default and explain the difference between the budget and the debt limit. (A budget is an accounting of proposed spending, a precursor to writing spending bills, and not doing a budget has no practical impact. But the debt limit is the cap on expenditures to pay the country’s bills. Not lifting the debt limit would lead to default and have global economic implications.)

According to several lawmakers and aides who were granted anonymity to speak about private conversations, some Republicans toyed with the idea of blocking an increase in the debt ceiling to get what they wanted to balance a budget — equating defaulting on the national debt as a similar tactic to shutting down the government, which is something most Republicans, including McCarthy, don’t want.

“We need the whole conference educated on the same level,” McCarthy told lawmakers then, according to people familiar with his remarks. “The more knowledge you have, the better off we’ll all be on what we can achieve and what we can get in the end.”

Several lawmakers involved in fiscal negotiations said they are confident their colleagues now understand the risk of default and no longer see the need to insist that a budget be readied or passed before raising the debt ceiling. Members of the Freedom Caucus, for example, now see multiple opportunities to propose federal spending cuts, including during the government funding deadline in the fall and next year if Congress and the White House agree to a Republican proposal of raising the debt ceiling only for one year.

It’s also increasingly likely that Republicans won’t unveil a budget before addressing the debt ceiling after leaders realized the challenges of compiling a document that would gain the support of the entire conference, according to multiple lawmakers.

Instead, the GOP leadership has been training members to direct their ire not at McCarthy or one another but at Biden for not engaging in debt limit negotiations....>

<....Roughly two dozen lawmakers who spoke to The Washington Post commended McCarthy’s inclusionary style, including praise from those who never voted in support of him for speaker. During a news conference on their budgetary demands last month, Reps. Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Andy Biggs (Ariz.), and Bob Good (Va.), all of whom voted “present” against McCarthy in January, expressed their gratitude to him for keeping his promise to reopen the appropriation process and include the House Freedom Caucus’s top line fiscal priorities in his recent letter to Biden.

“I think that indicates that we have a fairly united front, and I’m hoping and praying that it continues to be united as we go forward,” said Biggs, a former chairman of the Freedom Caucus who challenged McCarthy’s speakership bid.

McCarthy now meets with the chairs of the five ideological caucuses once a week when they’re in session and has deployed Rep. Garret Graves (La.) to oversee the larger Elected Leadership Committee, which gives more members an opportunity to represent their disparate factions’ opinions and argue over policy.

In an effort to keep the peace, McCarthy has often chosen to address concerns within the conference behind closed doors. That has brought grumblings at times, including when McCarthy and other leaders did not rebuke Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.) for her outlandish statements and behavior or call for the resignation of Rep. George Santos (N.Y.) after his lies were revealed.

“There may be little spikes of irritation based on the news of the day because, you know, we’re not all going to agree on everything,” Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), who chairs the governing-focused Main Street Caucus, said after McCarthy’s decision to give Fox News’s Tucker Carlson access to security footage from the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol insurrection — a decision that bothered lawmakers within Johnson’s group.

Tasked with delivering at least 218 Republican votes on GOP priorities, Majority Whip Tom Emmer (Minn.) has taken up an open-door policy, asking his colleagues what their red lines are, what they can live with, and what they may need to cast a tough vote — especially when trying to break logjams with members who “despise each other.”

“You may not want this person to get anything, and you are so sick and tired of this person taking everything,” Emmer said in an interview. “Our job is to make sure that at the end of the day, both of them walk away from the table and go, ‘Yep, I did the job I had to do for the people at home.’”

Those meetings, which also involve Deputy Whip Guy Reschenthaler (R-Pa.), have proved critical in shaping the debt ceiling framework McCarthy publicly unveiled Monday.

But McCarthy’s model for conference stability has not always worked.

Leaders at several times earlier this year miscalculated, believing they had widespread agreement on certain measures before running into the reality of their razor-thin majority. McCarthy’s effort to kick Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) off the Foreign Affairs Committee, for example, received blowback from some members. To secure their vote to remove Omar, he had to offer those opposed the opportunity to brainstorm establishing a higher threshold for such actions.

Leaders also readied a resolution to condemn the Biden administration for not shooting down a Chinese spy balloon in U.S. airspace, but had to change it to broadly condemn the Chinese Communist Party because some Republicans argued they would vote on something without knowing all of the facts.

Most notably, leaders had expected to bring a border security proposal by Rep. Chip Roy (Tex.) straight to the floor as one of their first action items of the Congress, a key election tenet. But when a campaign promise was put to paper, there wasn’t enough Republican support for it. The bill was supposed to advance in the more ideologically conservative Judiciary Committee in March, but consensus among key players had yet to be reached. While Republicans are likely to pass their proposals through committee this month, a final vote remains unclear because opposition in the wider conference remains....>

<....“If there’s one member on your committee that has a problem, imagine that there’s probably a dozen members on the House floor that have a similar problem, which means the bill doesn’t pass,” said House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.), who has moderated conversations among lawmakers on border security. “We can’t deal with a problem on the floor. That’s not the best place to deal with it.”

Then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was known for scheduling bills for a vote without giving her caucus much of a heads up, often leading to stalled hours-long votes because a handful of Democrats would balk, threatening their four-vote majority margin.

GOP leaders cannot afford to let such battles play out on the floor. The trials of McCarthy’s speakership election exemplified — and reminded — Republicans that their staunchly conservative colleagues are more willing to buck leadership than Democrats.

Some Republicans have privately expressed doubts about how long the good faith can last. Many speculate the debate on how to fund the government will not just test their relationships, but also test whether any lawmaker pulls the trigger to oust McCarthy as speaker if they don’t get their way.

“I have said this all along,” said Rep. David Joyce (Ohio), who chairs the more pragmatic Republican Governance Group. “It boils down to trust. Eventually, we’re going to have to hold hands and jump off the cliff together and trust each other that we’re going to get to the bottom.”

Where Republicans are headed

Hours before McCarthy publicly unveiled Republicans’ debt ceiling negotiation framework Monday, leaders involved reassured colleagues that all factions will continue to play a role in shaping it, according to multiple lawmakers who participated in a conference call led by GOP leaders Sunday. But the current cohesion, and leadership’s ability to manage demands, will be tested on several fronts in the coming weeks and months.

For instance, McCarthy’s debt plan includes work requirements for safety-net programs, including Medicaid, which will undoubtedly be controversial. Some of the more moderate members don’t want the programs altered.

And according to people familiar with the discussions, leadership’s initial directive to each ideological faction was to avoid putting out their own position statement related to the debt ceiling without first informing one another about it. The House Freedom Caucus bucked that ask, shocking some members, when it released what demands it has in exchange for its votes in raising the debt ceiling. The White House has highlighted those demands, which Biden referenced in his response to McCarthy, as unreasonable.

Now the Republican Study Committee, the Main Street Caucus, the Republican Governance Group and possibly even the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus will release their own plans. Meanwhile, Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-Tex.), who was described in the New York Times article as lacking McCarthy’s confidence, presented a budget at the Republican retreat last month, but it’s unclear if it will ever be released.

“This is a failure of the five family meetings,” said one person familiar with internal dynamics of House Republicans, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to reveal internal frustrations. “We wanted to avoid a fractured caucus,” but it “didn’t work out as intended.”

Asked whether each faction releasing its own proposals disrupts leadership’s goal of uniting the conference, Emmer said that “we don’t control anybody” and that leaders’ ask to members has always been “that they’d be upfront and direct” with them about what they could support.

After the spring recess, Republicans had hoped to piece together a border security package, which many GOP lawmakers said is a critical campaign pledge the conference must address before fiscal debates consume the rest of the year....>

<....A small group of lawmakers, including Scalise and the chairs of each committee, have been working to hash out their differences. The two members at the forefront of the public debate are Texas Republicans Roy and Tony Gonzales, who represents the largest stretch of the Texas-U.S. border. They have sparred publicly over Roy’s bill, which critics say threatens migrants fleeing violence from claiming asylum at the border.

Gonzales says he’s fine being the outspoken critic of Roy’s bill, which he has called “anti-Christian,” because he is quietly backed by almost a dozen lawmakers who he says have “the most to lose” — vulnerable incumbents who helped gain the majority and representatives of large Hispanic communities. Roy argues the debate is less about specifics and more about showing the differences between Democrats and Republicans on an important issue for many voters, particularly the conservative base.

Gonzales acknowledged others may think he’s acting selfishly but said leadership can preserve their good standing by hashing out differences now rather than later.

“It can’t just be this, ‘Oh, we tried,’ and blame the Democrats [for inaction]. That doesn’t help me or my district one bit,” he said.

Back in the ceremonial Capitol office, Graves credited input from each caucus, including Emmer’s listening sessions, as laying the foundation of McCarthy’s letter to Biden detailing what their budget would include.

“Even people in our party that don’t agree on things sit down and talk with each other,” House Freedom Caucus Chairman Scott Perry (Pa.) said about Republicans’ call to reunite Biden and McCarthy before working unilaterally. “So that’s a minimum standard.”>

Furthermore, Raymond Keene is a fellow member, and grandmaster who served as Garry Kasparov's second. Show some respect, if the concept is not beyond your grasp.>

@#$% CG and @#$% its corrupt mods. This site is a cess pit.>

<Plagued throughout her vice presidency with bad press, Kamala Harris has of late been going on the attack against Republican opponents. Can she still make herself the likely successor to President Biden as the Democratic standard-bearer?

Kamala Harris: Can She Make a Comeback?

There are two famous maxims about vice presidents: That the second person on the ticket, whether during a campaign or their actual time in office, serves as an “attack dog” against the administration’s opponents. The other has been attributed to FDR-era Vice President John Nance Garner, who is believed to have said that the vice presidency "is not worth a bucket of warm spit.”(There is some doubt among historians whether Garner actually said that, however.)

Harris in the Veep Role

Throughout her time as vice president, Kamala Harris has haunted, you could say, by the latter maxim. She has been contracted, somewhat, by the natural limits of the vice presidency, a job that does not prescribe any specific powers or duties, aside from succeeding the president should he die or be incapacitated. Therefore, Harris has been assigned intractable tasks, such as dealing with the border.

However, of late, Harris has begun to embrace the other traditional role of an attack dog.

Speaking last Friday at the annual convention of the Rev. Al Sharpton’s National Action Network, Harris ripped Republicans and warned that America’s “founding principles are under attack.”

“We all love our country,” the vice president said at the event in New York. “That’s why we fight so hard, we love our country. And we stand in the long tradition of those who have faithfully believed in the founding principles of our nation.”

She then launched into what has become a frequent Democratic message about Republicans in the Biden era.

“Extremists across our country attack the freedom to vote,” Harris said. “They ban books to attempt to erase America's full history. They attack the ability of people to love openly with pride. They attack the freedom of a woman to make decisions about her own body instead of the government. They attack medication that for 20 years the FDA ruled as being safe. And just yesterday in Florida, extremists there signed a six-week ban before most women even know they're pregnant.”

Approval and Line of Succession

Harris maintains a low approval rating, even lower than that of President Biden, who has rarely cracked 50 percent during his presidency.

That introduces a dynamic that has happened less frequently with vice presidents in the past: If Biden, who at 80 is the oldest president in history, were to pass away or otherwise become incapacitated during his current term, Harris would of course assume the presidency. That would also be the case should Biden be re-elected in 2024, and have something happen to him during his second term.

But if Biden decides for some reason not to run again, Harris would not necessarily emerge as the no-doubt frontrunner. She would likely emerge as one of several Democrats vying to succeed Biden – which, should Biden either win or lose in 2024, will likely happen in 2028.

Biden told NBC News’ Al Roker in an interview last week that he plans to run again in 2024, but was not yet ready to make an official announcement. Biden has not yet made such a decision as to who will manage the campaign or where the headquarters will be located, even as former President Donald Trump announced his candidacy six months ago and numerous people in both parties have been periodically announcing their candidacies.

“Closed-door meetings about when to roll out the president’s campaign are intensifying,” the New York Times reported Monday about Biden’s process. “Still, with no serious primary challenge and Republicans infighting, he feels little pressure.”

Indeed, the only Democrats in the race so far are 2020 candidate Marianne Williamson and anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and no governors, senators, or other elected Democrats have gotten into the race. >

....Since perfidious has admitted to having a mental health disorder, lets [sic] quickly request the government deny access to guns for everyone's safety.>

<Thankfully for Fox News, Donald Trump has offered up a brilliant new strategy to solve its legal woes: just lie more.

“IF FOX WOULD FINALLY ADMIT THAT THERE WAS LARGE SCALE CHEATING & IRREGULARITIES IN THE 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, WHICH WOULD BE A GOOD THING FOR THEM, & FOR AMERICA, THE CASE AGAINST THEM, WHICH SHOULD NOT HAVE EXISTED AT ALL, WOULD BE GREATLY WEAKENED,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “BACK UP THOSE PATRIOTS AT FOX INSTEAD OF THROWING THEM UNDER THE BUS – & THEY ARE RIGHT! THERE IS SOOO MUCH PROOF, LIKE MASS BALLOT STUFFING CAUGHT ON GOVERNMENT CAMERAS, FBI COLLUDING WITH TWITTER & FACEBOOK, STATE LEGISLATURES NOT USED, etc.”

The former president fired off his all-caps advice at 2:39 a.m.

<One can envision <liceman> bringing his 'proof' that Chicago is the most dangerous city in recorded history before one of their hosts.

A real hoot would be guest star <gazafan>, outlining the sorry history of race discrimination in the NFL since the start of the new millennium. The parade of sorry hasbeenusetawas white defensive backs who have been shut out by those heartless reverse Jim Crow personnel types would reduce the toughest sumbitch going to tears.

The above would serve as a mere prelude to <gazafan>'s real issue to be unveiled to Americans: white discrimination in every walk of life.

Another who would have a tale of woe would be that faux Christian of the American Rhineland, <ohiyuk>; his heart-rending story would be of the pitiful liberal, who is dumber than a box of rocks, inherently evil and has nothing positive to offer society.

<ACORN
BILL AYERS
REV WRIGHT
SAUL ALINKSY [sic]
DRUG USE IN COLLEGE*
SHAKEDOWN OF BUSINESSES IN CHICAGO
TEACHING OVERTHROW OF CONSTITUTION
TIES TO CHRONY [sic] CAPITALISTS
DENIGRATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
DOUBLECROSS OF MILITARY PERSONNEL**
FAVORITISM TOWARD MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD
UNWILLINGNESS TO DIVULGE COLLEGE RECORDS>

Has he ever proven any of the above?

<In his first week back after sustaining a fall last month, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.) defended the Supreme Court’s independence amid calls from Democrats for new ethics rules as well as an investigation into Justice Clarence Thomas’s financial dealings.

Since the release of the draft opinion in the Dobbs case, which overturned Roe v. Wade, Democrats have intensified their attacks on the third branch, criticizing recent opinions and supporting demonstrations against the justices. Earlier this month, it came to light that Senate Democrats wanted to make funding for next year’s Supreme Court term conditional on the creation of an ethics code.

Democrats have now zeroed in on reports from ProPublica that allege Justice Clarence Thomas did not disclose gifts from billionaire Harlan Crow as well as real-estate deals between the two. Responding to the first article, Thomas explained in a statement that he has complied with disclosure guidelines throughout his tenure and he intends to continue to comply with new guidelines that were announced last month. But this statement has not mollified Democrats, who have intensified calls for an ethics code and even an investigation into Thomas. The Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee plan to hold a hearing on the matter.

Asked to weigh in during a press conference on Tuesday, McConnell explained he has confidence the Supreme Court can deal with any ethical issues internally.

“I have total confidence in the Chief Justice of the United States to deal with these internal court issues,” McConnell said.

The Senate minority leader also stressed that challenging the judiciary’s independence is not a new approach for Democrats.

“The Supreme Court and the court system is a whole separate part of our Constitution and the Democrats it seems to me spent a lot of time criticizing individual members of the court and going after the Court as an institution,” McConnell said. “For example, my counterpart went over in front of the Supreme Court and called out two of the Supreme Court justices by name, and actually threatened them with some kind of reprisal, I don’t know what kind, if they rule the wrong way in a case that he cared about.”

The Supreme Court asked Congress for a budget increase earlier this year to cover higher security expenditures. Threats against the Court have increased since the Dobbs decision, with frequent protests outside the Court as well as outside the homes of the justices. Additionally, an individual was arrested for planning to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Republican senators on the Judiciary committee grilled Attorney General Merrick Garland in March on why he had failed to bring forward a single prosecution in connection with these protests, which are criminalized under statute, but Garland dodged the question. McConnell brought up Garland’s public response to the protests Tuesday, saying: “The attorney general seemed to be largely unconcerned with security issues around the homes of Supreme Court members.”

Crow, who is at center of the Thomas controversy, recently gave an interview to the Dallas Morning News in which he defended his friendship with Thomas and rejected the ProPublica allegations.

“I don’t think the media cares really much about Harlan Crow, and I think they’re right. They shouldn’t care much about Harlan Crow,” he said. “But I think that the media, and this ProPublica group in particular, funded by leftists, has an agenda to destabilize the Court. What they’ve done is not truthful. It lacks integrity. They’ve done a pretty good job in the last week or two of unfairly slamming me and more importantly than that, unfairly slamming Justice Thomas.”

“It’s a political hit job,” Crow explained.>