Tom Toles for January 31, 2014

They decided to split the difference, King Solomon style.

Didn’t you hear Eric Cantor explain how the Republicans have always been willing to work with Obama and his inability to understand why the President has decided to do what he can without them? Surely that nonsense must be growing tiresome even to the people in the Faux news bubble. There’s a limit to how gullible people can be.

Congress is full of two-faced Republicans. Saying they would gladly work with the President then voting over and over again against any meaningful proposal. Unless you want war or huge tax breaks for the wealthy, don’t come knocking on our Congressional doors.

“Inspired by actual events” is quite different from “a true story.” As we all ought to know.

It has been worse. Copied from the United States Senate website:On May 22, 1856, the “world’s greatest deliberative body” became a combat zone. In one of the most dramatic and deeply ominous moments in the Senate’s entire history, a member of the House of Representatives entered the Senate chamber and savagely beat a senator into unconsciousness.The inspiration for this clash came three days earlier when Senator Charles Sumner, a Massachusetts antislavery Republican, addressed the Senate on the explosive issue of whether Kansas should be admitted to the Union as a slave state or a free state. In his “Crime Against Kansas” speech, Sumner identified two Democratic senators as the principal culprits in this crime—Stephen Douglas of Illinois and Andrew Butler of South Carolina. He characterized Douglas to his face as a “noise-some, squat, and nameless animal . . . not a proper model for an American senator.” Andrew Butler, who was not present, received more elaborate treatment. Mocking the South Carolina senator’s stance as a man of chivalry, the Massachusetts senator charged him with taking “a mistress . . . who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight—I mean,” added Sumner, “the harlot, Slavery.” Representative Preston Brooks was Butler’s South Carolina kinsman. If he had believed Sumner to be a gentleman, he might have challenged him to a duel. Instead, he chose a light cane of the type used to discipline unruly dogs. Shortly after the Senate had adjourned for the day, Brooks entered the old chamber, where he found Sumner busily attaching his postal frank to copies of his “Crime Against Kansas” speech.Moving quickly, Brooks slammed his metal-topped cane onto the unsuspecting Sumner’s head. As Brooks struck again and again, Sumner rose and lurched blindly about the chamber, futilely attempting to protect himself. After a very long minute, it ended.Bleeding profusely, Sumner was carried away. Brooks walked calmly out of the chamber without being detained by the stunned onlookers. Overnight, both men became heroes in their respective regions.Surviving a House censure resolution, Brooks resigned, was immediately reelected, and soon thereafter died at age 37. Sumner recovered slowly and returned to the Senate, where he remained for another 18 years. The nation, suffering from the breakdown of reasoned discourse that this event symbolized, tumbled onward toward the catastrophe of civil war.This account underplays the severity of injuries Sumner suffered and the fact that Brooks continued to beat Sumner after he was unconscious, nor says much about the three years Sumner spent in recovering. It is telling that the South considered Brooks a hero for his assault on an unarmed colleague. At Brooks’ funeral, Rep. John Savage of Tennessee praised it, likening it to Brutus’ assassination of Caesar. (And for the record: Sumner was a Liberal and a Republican; Brooks was a Conservative and a Democrat. Not that any of those four terms have anything like the same meaning today that they did in 1856.)

. “There’s a limit to how gullible people can be.” No, there isn’t.

I also saw an article saying the reported had begged the congressman for a short interview specifically to ask about the SotU address – and then sandbagged him with a different question. Petty, ambush journalism. Neither guy comes off well in the story.

Thanks, Michael. Very helpful.

Thanks, Michael. Very helpful.

Thanks for the links. They help to prove my contention that what the Republicans say, although quite attractive, is quite different from what they actually do, or attempt to do. Wrong is right, up is down. Where have I heard that before?

Maybe you watched this clip through the filter of Fox News, but we didn’t see the reporter ask Grimm the initial question, just reporting back that Grimm didn’t want to answer the question. Then Grimm came back and said yada yada could they please have lunch together the next day.See? No harm done!

Reporter: Asked a different question than politician was expecting.Politician: Blustered insults and threatened personal violence.

Yeah. I’d say they’re BOTH EQUALLY GUILTY, all right. Thuggery and doing one’s job are both reprehensible.

To put some perspective on this there was an assault committed by one representative upon another with a cane.This took place on the floor of the house, if memory serves, and resulted in the death of the assault victim. This occurred back in the 1800s. I don’t recall the member who committed the crime getting any jail time but I might be wrong on that.At least, our Congress doesn’t behave like the Ukrainian Parliament does on occasion.

Methinks Grimm probably doesn’t know anything about cutting it in two and giving each a half, but as he was heard on national and worldwide TV saying: I’m going to break you in half and throw you off of the balcony (or words to that effect). …… I don’t think this has anything to do with liberalating or conservatating… CIVILITY works on both sides of the line, eh?

congress is full of creeps