Fox News: House Democrats averted a messy leadership struggle, clearing the way for Maryland Rep. Steny Hoyer to become second in command of their new minority without a challenge from South Carolina Rep. James Clyburn.
Under an arrangement worked out in private, officials said late Friday that Clyburn would instead receive a new position, title unknown and duties undescribed, explicitly labeled the third-ranking post in leadership.
The maneuvering was described by Democratic officials after Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., issued a vaguely worded statement saying she intends to nominate Clyburn to a new No. 3 post. The statement made no mention of Hoyer, and officials who filled in the details did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were not permitted to speak publicly about the matter.
Who said Democrats cannot create jobs? They most certainly can, especially when it comes to jobs for themselves. Ed Morrissey at Hot Air explains it perfectly:
Ed Morrissey: When a private sector organization loses resources and has to downsize, it has to make painful decisions on reshuffling their management to account for fewer positions, usually requiring a few demotions or outright exits. Not so in the House Democratic caucus. When faced with the conundrum of fitting four existing leadership members into three positions, Nancy Pelosi struggled hard for a solution — until she remembered her Democratic agenda of public-sector management and decided to just expand leadership to accommodate the odd man out.
Something else I want to point out from the article.
A race between Hoyer, D-Md., and Clyburn, D-S.C., for the post of party whip took shape in the days following the election and quickly took on racial overtones. Clyburn is the most powerful African-American in Congress, and he drew a formal endorsement from the Congressional Black Caucus. But he failed to generate enough additional support to overcome Hoyer's strength among liberals and conservatives alike, and it appeared his only options were to run against Hoyer and lose or else concede the obvious and step aside.
After reading this part, I have to say creating that job for Clyburn looks rather patronizing. It is almost like an Affirmative Action set aside, just to keep the CBC happy and avoid the fact that Hoyer would have won with only white Democrat support.
Via: Memeorandum
Via: Fox News
Via: Hot Air
Posts
5 comments:
Clyburn is no dunce, but they're sure treating him like an affirmative action appointment.
None of which changes the fact that each candidate was supported only by Democrats of their own race. There are only three ways to explain this:
A. The CBC are racist
B. White Democrats are racist
C. Both A and B
So, Nancy, which explanation is correct? Can we see this question asked of her in a press conference, please?
Well Clifton I was getting the same reaction as your final thought.
These socialists do not like elections which in this case the worst kind in their minds; An up-or-down vote, raw numbers.
If Clyburn wanted the post? why not fight for it? Ah yes, follow the money, election cycle money of course and God only knows what else.
Patronising to create a "new post", no flat out racist and corrupt.
Do these creatures of evil not realize the veil has been lifted and all can see exactly what and who they are?
This is where my 'pop-off' valve launches into space.
Oh yeah... the Repub Party is racist... the TEA Party is racist and yet..... where do we find racism at it's worst??? Why right in the heart of the Democrat Party.
"Clyburn's office declined to comment on the developments.
The leadership posts will be filled formally next week during a closed-door meeting of the Democratic rank and file."
And they are so proud of this new office that they're going to 'fill-in' the blanks when Clyburn gets put into his new position in a 'closed-door' meeting.
If Pelosi had any decency, she'd step aside, let the much more sensible Hoyer take over and, yes, let Mr. Clyburn be. She obviously won't, though. Far too addicted to the power.
Post a Comment