Is Hastert Next?
By on Jan 9th, 2006 at 7:10 am
Is Hastert Next?
“In the first sign that even Hastert could be in trouble, Rep. John E. Sweeney (R-N.Y.) said Republicans should consider whether to replace the speaker. “The time is right for us to do some soul-searching and have an open dialogue about the direction of the House.” (Via HuffPost)
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Oh joy. We could get Boehner. Real paragon of virtue.
January 9th, 2006 at 7:22 amWhy all of a sudden should anyone in the GOP start changing their tolerance level for pain? Really, do you think Denns Hastert is about give an inch? i think some necessary amputations, civil war style, will happen to eliminate the festering sores but they will just get more brazen. The House aint the Senate, lots more depth in the ranks to put this one to bed. This will be eaten by the short memory public and by the time elections come around it will be a zit that has been popped. Valerie who? Alito hearings at NOON EST today.Enjoy, Happy Monday. Thanks.
January 9th, 2006 at 7:49 amHasert needs to be replaced,he is the best friend of delay’s.
January 9th, 2006 at 8:01 amThe trick will be to keep public awareness keen, but with all the living standard issues the Republiscum have “created” (remember they promised to “create their own reality): overly inflated energy, food and medical costs, loved ones embroiled in an unnecessary war, loss of wages/jobs etc…
…who has time to think about whether or not Hastert gets the boot from his leadership perch? Some of us have been given either a “bone” or a stay of execution (semi-job security) by the elites, divide and conquer has always been a cheap (but effective) trick to keep them in power. Ten months from now inbreds will be busy voting back in their sleazy, scummy representatives and we’ll be faced with some new dilemma to distract us.
Inbreds are the problem, period!
January 9th, 2006 at 8:09 amOr Cornyn or Reed or Bush (Rove) or Hastert or…
Greenwald is a weapon!
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/
January 9th, 2006 at 8:25 amSort of off-topic, but let’s review, shall we?
NO DEMOCRAT ACCEPTED MONEY FROM ABRAMOFF.
It couldn’t be clearer.
Let’s see a troll spin that. It should be highly amusing.
January 9th, 2006 at 8:57 am#7, Did you see Howard Dean on CNN yesterday? He left Blitzer speechless. Repubs try to make this bi-partisan, but it is all their party.
January 9th, 2006 at 9:43 amThe Dems took donations from tribes, whom they represent. No Dem changed his vote after a donation was received. They did not take money from Abranoff — why should they? The Dems have no influence in Government; the Repubs do.
They should all be running scared, but there is safety in numbers, to some extent; they are in control of everything, there are so many involved, they won’t go down easy.
Indeed, everytime an Abramoff story gets circulated containing the phrase “and Democrats” we should send out the phone calls and emails reminding them of Dean’s words: No Democrats accepted money from Abramoff, either directly or indirectly (from an organization sending funds at Abramoff’s request). Zero. Zilch. Nada.
January 9th, 2006 at 9:50 amIndeed, everytime an Abramoff story gets circulated containing the phrase “and Democrats†we should send out the phone calls and emails reminding them of Dean’s words
Comment by TheToonGuy #6
WARNING! WARNING!
The MSM is in cahoots with republiscum (due to their corporate ownership) to confuse inbred Bushites, making them believe that Abramoff’s influence peddling affected both parties…
Left-wing media bias my rect*m…
January 9th, 2006 at 9:59 amUnless the GOP takes its chances and successfully continues to lie and bribe (ummm….I suppose bears shi* in the woods) in covering up the Abramoff connections, all of the details will be exposed in court. This is why the Judicial branch is so critical at this point in our history. The legislature is corrupt and obviously nothing needs to be said about the executive. The crusade by the right to eradicate “activist” judges is clearly not so much about the farcical wedge issues (can you say Terry Schiavo, abortion and gau marriage) that they’d like the sheeple to believe, it’s about keeping their asses out of prison.
The GOP is in very deep trouble and they know that the only way out is a “friendly” judiciary. Let’s hope all of Bush’s crony appointments haven’t corrupted that branch too deeply.
January 9th, 2006 at 10:09 amThe GOP is in very deep trouble and they know that the only way out is a “friendly†judiciary. Let’s hope all of Bush’s crony appointments haven’t corrupted that branch too deeply.
Comment by Jay #11
ummm let’s see they’ve got Clarence “Stepinfetchit” Thomas, Antonin Scumlia, John “Busha*slickin” Roberts, Anthony “Schizophrenic” Kennedy, and (coming soon) Sam Scandalito…
I wouldn’t put much faith in the judiciary…
January 9th, 2006 at 11:36 amI hear you papa, the SC looks pretty grim….but what percentage of the cases tied to GOP corruption will rise to that level?
The Democowards need to block Alito with everything in their arsenal, no doubt.
January 9th, 2006 at 11:48 amThe Democowards need to block Alito with everything in their arsenal, no doubt.
Comment by Jay #13
I’m just wondering how devastating could the “nuclear option” be?
Would it be a prelude to civil war?
January 9th, 2006 at 12:32 pm…prelude to civil war?
If the self-righteous, Southern, GOP slimeball politicians have anything to do with it, a new civil war would already be under way. Witness the core rightwing/GOP message. The “liberals” in the Northeast and West Coast are rich, elitist, secularists and academics who think they’re smarter than you, the “liberal” politicians from those regions want to steal your tax dollars to subvert personal responsibility and encourage lazy non-white’s and immigrants to suck off the system.
These tired fallacies are how they’ve motivated their narrow-minded, hateful, bigoted base. Just listen to Limbaugh, O’Reilly or Malkin for lessons in how to foster ignorance.
I still believe that the majority of Americans know better, but many are easily blinded by irrational fear. The wedge issues the wingnuts push certainly divide us. They play on the resentments of Southerners, many cannot get past the original Civil War. Fools.
January 9th, 2006 at 1:55 pmThese tired fallacies are how they’ve motivated their narrow-minded, hateful, bigoted base. Just listen to Limbaugh, O’Reilly or Malkin for lessons in how to foster ignorance.
The only thing “tired” and “fallacious” here is that statement. I am not narrow-minded, hateful or bigoted … I just don’t agree with the liberal social (some of them, I agree some here actually) and fiscal view of the world?
I’m not sure why it’s hard to imagine that a reasonable person could disagree with you … is this why some engage in constant demonization of political opposites … if they’re heaving monsters, then they’re obviously wrong?
I don’t get it … I can think you’re dead wrong in your opinion and still acknowledge that your dissent isn’t based upon some lack of moral fiber or ambiguous evil … you just disagree …
January 9th, 2006 at 2:42 pmHi Folks,
Yeah, caught Sweeney making this call Saturday…
Jeff Flake and Melissa hart have apparently made similar sounds though Sweeney is the first to call out hastert directly.
The question remains… is Sweeney acting on his own (he is ambitious enough) or is he performing his usual role as hit man thug for someone else (Tom Reynolds perhaps)?
January 9th, 2006 at 2:56 pmI don’t get it … I can think you’re dead wrong in your opinion and still acknowledge that your dissent isn’t based upon some lack of moral fiber or ambiguous evil … you just disagree …
Comment by Giacomo #16
jaggoffmore,
Shoot your best shot!
Convince me (and other Progressives on this forum) why I/we ought to vote republiscum and support the right wing inbred, criminal Bushite agenda?
January 9th, 2006 at 7:39 pm