Kevin McCarthy Embraced Partisanship—at His Own Peril

It’s not clear his replacement will do much differently.

By
84
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy walks to the House chamber before a vote on Capitol Hill on Saturday, September 30, 2023. (Photo by Tom Brenner for The Washington Post via Getty Images)

As Republican after Republican stood on the House floor to defend then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy against a far-right effort to oust him on Tuesday, Democrats who were listening didn’t hear many arguments for why they should intervene. 

Rules Committee Chairman Tom Cole, an Oklahoma Republican, briefly mentioned the health of the institution, and North Carolina Rep. Patrick McHenry started to snidely address Democrats before his time expired. But most of the speeches in McCarthy’s favor were aimed squarely at the small contingent of his Republican critics, attempts to convince inconvincible people to be team players. It was absurd, considering everyone agreed Democrats controlled McCarthy’s fate. And in the hours leading up to the vote, the California Republican publicly declared he wouldn’t consider any agreement with Democrats to save his speakership.

Yet after losing the gavel, McCarthy blamed Democrats for not taking the responsible course. “I think today was a political decision,” he said of their refusal to stop Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz’s motion to vacate. “My fear is the institution fell today.”

McCarthy’s comments about the good of the institution were laughable to Democrats, who had grown more and more resentful of him, particularly after his response to the ransacking of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. 

You're out of free articles
Create an account to unlock 1 more articles
By signing up with your email, you agree to The Dispatch’s privacy policy and terms and conditions
Already have an account? Sign In
84
By
Comments (84)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Robert Knudson

    McCarthy sowed into the wind; funny how he reaped the whirlwind. Can’t wait for more of the same down the pike from the GOP.
    More than being a ladder, chaos is chaos. There is nothing conservative about this GOP.

    Collapse
  2. Laurie

    Congratulations Haley on asking that question to McCarthy and your great reporting. If his response doesn't appear in campaign ads for Democrats, it will certainly appear in psychology textbooks under "gaslighting".

    Collapse
  3. Rossknode

    It's frustrating that Republicans expected Democrats to do something they themselves would not do. Moderate Republicans had the power to not let this happen months ago. They chose to allow the "burn it down" group lead the party. That was their choice and now they need to deal with the consequences of that choice.

    Collapse
  4. Kbg

    I'm very closely watching moderate R's right now. They are in a position of considerable power. If they aren't willing to drive moderation home via forcing caucus rule changes to mitigate the crazies or teaming with the D's to upset the Speakership race to swing it to a more moderate R member...then let the seats turn blue. You either are or are not a moderating force.

    Collapse
  5. Joe1776

    These are the democrats that spent millions to help people like Gaetz win primaries. Helping the fringe republicans gain momentum is the democrats main play - all the while claiming how they are a threat to democracy.

    Collapse
  6. Joe1776

    The problem for democrats is they can't help but lie. Trump's rhetoric was irresponsible and a protest turned violent. Trump then acted atrociously in failing to deal with it appropriately just like dems had acted atrociously in failing to address the various blm riots which cost far more lives and money. But then Dems insist everyone must claim this was some sort of planned armed coup to overturn the government. And well that is absurd to any thinking person.

    Democrats and Gaetz make good bedfellows.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Wj

      > Trump then acted atrociously in failing to deal with it appropriately...

      Trump acted *deliberately* in failing to deal with it. The rioters were doing exactly what he wanted them to do.

      He didn't call them off until *after* Pence broke the chain of command and called in the National Guard to clear the Capitol building.

      Collapse
      1. Joe1776

        I can agree with everything you say, but that is different then planning and executing an violent insurrection. He did not make any arrangements to get generals or military to flip to his side. This was just a protest turned violent. Even if he wanted it to be violent just like I strongly suspect many democrats were happy about the BLM violence that is not the same as saying either was a coup attempt. They were all protests that turned violent. The main difference is once the conservative one turned violent no one showed up on January 7th. The BLM riots were stoked by political leaders and even after people knew they were turning violent they continued to show up. But none of them were a coup attempt or an insurrection.

        Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Joseph.A.Timmer

      Reflexive partisanship is how we deal with the facts that make us too uncomfortable. The truth is that while not everyone at the insurrection had arrived with an intent to be violent, the gallows to hang Mike Pence did not emerge from the fire on its own when everyone had thrown in their ear rings.

      I lived through the Black Lives Matter riots in Chicago and they were absolutely terrible but we can't just point to something that "they" did that was bad every time "we" are accused of something. Sometimes the side we align with did the thing and there need to be consequences.

      Collapse
      1. Joe1776

        I agree with you. Two things can be true: 1) Trump acted indefensibly and 2) this was not a planned violent coup to overthrow the United States of America .

        This is what I mean about democrats having to lie. They can't just say his actual actions were horrible they have to make claims that are clearly factually false. And then anyone who points out that those claims are false they say "well you are just trying to defend Trump." I have no interest in defending Trump. I really just want to talk to people based on reality and facts.

        The BLM riots were not an insurrection or a coup. My saying that does not mean I think they were justified. Many politicians promoted lies about racism that stoked the violence and many politicians knew or should have know their actions would lead to violence. But those politicians were not trying to over throw the USA by violence. IMO the BLM riots and those politicians and media foisting the lies were bad enough. I don't need to lie and claim it was some planned attempt to violently overthrow the United States of America.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Joseph.A.Timmer

          I guess the rub lies with "clearly factually false" since the Proud Boys being sentenced for sedition would make that an untenable statement alone. Trump is currently being prosecuted on whether or not his incitement was criminal but the actions themselves were clearly more than a group of angry people engaged in random violence. The purpose was clear.

          Collapse
          1. Joe1776

            "Sedition" is a very broad crime as written in Federal law.

            The actions of the j6 people were not different from antifa or some bad eggs during the BLM protests. People were showing up to those protests and acting violently night after night.

            I stopped following all the various lawsuits and charges Democrats are bringing against Trump. Some are stronger then others, but they would need to throw the first amendment out of the window to convict him for incitement based on his political speech he gave asking them to march peacefully. A conviction for that speech would really be a low point for freedom of speech in the United States. I just can't imagine that will pass muster for any judge.

            And again this in no way should be interpreted as me thinking it is anything short of a travesty that Trump is seriously running for president of the USA again. Between him and Biden I am so sick of American politics I had to walk away from politics for several weeks. It is just all too much to stomach.

            Collapse
    3. DFG

      Planned? January 6? Oh no, all those Trumpers who carried weapons, bear spray and clubs while wearing Kevlar helmets and flack vests just dress like that all the time. They didn’t plan to attack anything, and Trump telling them to be there as it would be wild? Pure coincidence. But damn those Democrats and their phony claims.

      Collapse
      1. Joe1776

        No evidence suggests Trump did had any plans to take over the US military or any sort of armed force that would even remotely win against the US military on January 6th. Can you agree on that? It is insane to think he was trying to violently overthrow the US government with some guys with bear spray and clubs.

        Did some people come looking for violence? I'm sure! Some may have came prepared to defend themselves if they were attacked as so many protests had turned violent at that time. But it was no different then the BLM protests.

        Collapse
        1. Francislyo

          Many of the Jan 6th crowd had guns, and their aim was to overturn the results of the 2020 election, as per Trump's calling on them to serve as his militia. Their specific aim was to pressure Mike Pence to unilaterally invalidate the election, then the Trump plan was to replace the duly elected electors with fake electors.

          Collapse
        2. DFG

          Like everything Trump does, January 6 was half-assed. There’s no way it would have succeeded without the military getting involved. But with the fake electors plot you can’t deny his plan was to overturn an election no matter how delusional that plan might have been. And there’s no comparison to BLM riots. Those weren’t organized and led by politicians trying to retain power.

          Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Mudskipper

        Not to mention the whole plot to have Pence throw out the electoral votes from certain states and then substitute a set of fake electoral votes in their place.

        Collapse
        1. Joe1776

          You know that argument was used before right? Was the first time the argument was made an attempt to overthrow the government too?
          And you know Pence didn't even make that an issue right?
          Those are two separate issues that you are trying to conflate to support your narrative.

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            Mudskipper

            No. You are completely wrong.

            No sitting President before Trump pressured his VP to throw out electoral votes instead of merely opening and counting them. There is a process for challenging electoral votes and that process HAS been used before. What Trump was pressuring Pence to do is to entirely side-step the process outlined in the Constitution and to claim a power that he DID NOT have.

            Pence apparently agonized over what to do, and finally made the right decision and didn't go along with what Trump wanted. But that still doesn't let Trump off the hook.

            You apparently are conflating an entirely constitutional process for challenging electoral votes with an entirely unconstitutional gambit to support your narrative.

            Collapse
        2. DFG

          I’m sure that was all spur of the moment. Something they came up with on the fly.

          Collapse
  7. Mirabelle

    D's blocking Republicans who tried to overturn the election from co-sponsoring their bills is sensible. I wouldn't want any of that stink on my bills if I were a Rep. Those members showed their lack of analysis and would only cast doubt on the validity of the bill. Jokers sponsoring your bill really isn't a recommendation. There are voters who pay attention to things like bill sponsors.

    The benefit of moderation is certainly there. The R's, not being good at understanding these things, may reject it, but R's are on a cliff edge and some of them know it.

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Earl King

    Hayley, I have one question. Cannot someone introduce a bill to fund Ukraine and then file a discharge petition to get it on the floor where I have no doubt it would pass?

    Collapse
  9. Laurie Appleby

    Well done Haley and thank you!

    Collapse
  10. Ccutter80

    If 6 moderate Dems supported McCarthy they would have extinguished the power of the Chaos Caucus for good. Our government could have moved back to being a functioning entity. But no, instead we will spend the rest of the year watching the fractured GOP continue their internecine fighting and meanwhile our borders will overflow, crime will rage and nothing will be done. Damn them all.

    Collapse
    1. Harryanderson74

      Should we blame the Democrats for not helping McCarthy when he made a point of declining to seek their help?

      Collapse
    2. Steve Pic

      If 6 moderate Dems had voted for McCarthy, 100 Republicans would have joined the Gaetz camp. He was being forced out for negotiating with Democrats in the first place.

      Also, there was nothing stopping McCarthy from postponing the vote for two days and offering a deal to Jeffries.

      The idea that Democrats should have saved McCarthy out of pure altruism two days after he blamed them for almost causing a shutdown is utter insanity.

      Collapse
    3. GoldenRuleLover

      Not a chance. McCarthy was destined to continue to appease the MAGA caucus because he wants a cushy job post speaker just like Ryan got. He would have been dead man walking for trying to be bipartisan and govern effectively. He would have been Cheney’d lost his seat and be run out on a rail. By refusing to do a deal with Dems on keeping the speakership, he gets to be a victim, blame Dems, and still be acceptable in gop politics world. He can still get that Fox News board seat once he leaves Congress.

      Collapse
    4. Avatar photo
      Pbanuski

      Damn those Democrats for making McCarthy go to Mar-A-Largo after January 6th! And curse them for forcing him to accept the demands of Matt Gaetz. How could the Democrats have allowed that!? And further more, what kind of gall does it take to not act even after McCarthy said he wouldn’t compromise? Yes, those awful Democrats… using their witchcraft to make the Republicans look like small minded idiots. It’s all their fault!

      Get a clue man.

      Collapse
Load More