Mitch McConnell becomes longest serving party leader in Senate history

[Contrarian]

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell plans to mark his tenure as the chamber's longest-serving party leader with a speech on Tuesday afternoon paying tribute to the previous record holder: former Sen. Mike Mansfield, a Democrat from Montana.

Driving the news: The senior senator from Kentucky, 80, will eclipse Mansfield’s 16 years as party leader on Tuesday. Along the way, McConnell has delighted supporters and bedeviled opponents through crafty procedural maneuvers and — to some critics — brazen power grabs.

"The greatest honor of my career is representing the Commonwealth of Kentucky in this chamber and fighting for my fellow Kentuckians," McConnell plans to say from the Senate floor.

"But the second-greatest honor is the trust that my fellow Republican Senators have placed in me to lead our diverse Conference and help them achieve their goals," McConnell will say, according to prepared remarks.

Why it matters: McConnell has stayed in charge of the Senate GOP at a time of intense turmoil in the Republican Party, with powerful populist currents threatening its traditional power structures.

As minority leader, he warned Democrats not to change the filibuster rules for judicial nominees but then seized on their decision, winning confirmation for three of President Trump's Supreme Court Justices with a simple majority threshold.

The judicial branch has always been a priority for McConnell and he made his opposition to President Obama's court picks a touchstone of his tenure. Controversially, he refused to allow Obama's selection of then-judge Merrick Garland (now attorney general) to proceed in an election year.

The big picture: Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who is fighting to become speaker of the House, is the third House GOP leader to work with McConnell since he became leader in 2007.

Last year, McConnell survived a challenge from Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) and was re-elected party leader, 37-10. He arrived in the Senate after President Reagan's 1984 landslide.

In June of 2018, McConnell became the longest-serving Republican leader when he surpassed former Sen. Robert Dole (R-Kan.).

Between the lines: McConnell will take stock of previous Senate stalwarts, including Dole, Sen. Robert Taft (R-Ohio), and former President (and former Senate Majority Leader) Lyndon Johnson (D-Texas), commenting on their styles and the secrets of their successes.

With a wry wink, McConnell will align himself with senators who stayed out of the spotlight — leaders "who preferred to focus on serving their colleagues rather than dominating them,” McConnell will say.

“And that, Mr. / Madam President, is how Senator Michael Joseph Mansfield of Montana became the longest-serving Senate Leader in American history until this morning."

https://www.axios.com/2023/01/03/mitch-mcconnell-mansfield-senate-party-leader

Edited January 3 by Contrarian

[Rebound]

16 years? Big deal. Nancy Pelosi was leader of the House Democrats for 20 years.  

Edited January 3 by Rebound

[sharkman]

That reads like ad copy.  He’s nothing but a Rino.

[Hodad]

Mitch McConnell is not a good guy, but he sure is effective, and damned if the last 8 years haven't proved that we could do a lot worse. At least he's not opposed to doing the right thing when it's politically convenient.

[Hodad]

11 minutes ago, sharkman said:

That reads like ad copy.  He’s nothing but a Rino.

Doesn't it strike you as odd that the longest serving Republican leader in history is someone you call a RINO?

Is there anyone more Republican than the longest serving leader in party history. I have no love -- or even like -- for McConnell, but he is a model Republican and represents what the party has been for decades.

You Trumpistas are the RINOs, trying to take over the party, and if you had any question about just how radicalized you folks have become your bizarre perspective here should make it pretty clear. It's ludicrous.

Edited January 3 by Hodad

[sharkman]

55 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Doesn't it strike you as odd that the longest serving Republican leader in history is someone you call a RINO?

Is there anyone more Republican than the longest serving leader in party history. I have no love -- or even like -- for McConnell, but he is a model Republican and represents what the party has been for decades.

You Trumpistas are the RINOs, trying to take over the party, and if you had any question about just how radicalized you folks have become your bizarre perspective here should make it pretty clear. It's ludicrous.

No, it makes a lot of sense when you consider:  voting for the 1.7 trillion bill(7500 earmarks), when republicans would take over the House in late Jan and have more control of the writing/creation of these bills.

I could present you with a laundry list of his many misdeeds, but as a brainwashed activist, you can’t be helped.  Go buy an electric car that requires mining of 500,000 lbs of ore to produce its batteries so you can drain the grid.  

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, Hodad said:

Doesn't it strike you as odd that the longest serving Republican leader in history is someone you call a RINO?

 

also this:

"Trump's political party affiliation has changed numerous times. He registered as a Republican in Manhattan in 1987, switched to the Reform Party in 1999, the Democratic Party in 2001, and back to the Republican Party in 2009.<sup>[20]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_career_of_Donald_Trump#:~:text=Trump's political party affiliation has,the Republican Party in 2009.</sup>

 

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

No, it makes a lot of sense when you consider:  voting for the 1.7 trillion bill(7500 earmarks), when republicans would take over the House in late Jan and have more control of the writing/creation of these bills.

No offense, but the gap between what McConnell knows about that legislation and what you know is absolutely enormous. He got his wins--he always does. 

And he doesn't want to be held hostage by the kooks coming into the House any more than the Democrats do. That doesn't make him a RINO, it makes him a legislator.

You might have a more radical agenda, but you don't get to redefine what "Republican" means to suddenly exclude the guy who has been living and leading as a Republican for decades. That's just silly.

[Contrarian]

3 hours ago, Hodad said:

Mitch McConnell is not a good guy

He is a good guy for his ideology as much as Ted Kennedy was for his ideology. 

He is not a good guy for you, because you are a liberal probably from California too 😎😅

As someone that is watching this as spectator from Canada, I would say that what McConnell did with the Supreme Court will be his legacy for conservatives in America. 

Everything else is just sour grapes from the opposite side. He shaped the court for generations to come and still was not enough for Trump and his football hooligans followers.

In my opinion he leaves politics as a winner. After some years, people will even forget his other minor scandals. 

Edited January 3 by Contrarian

[Contrarian]

6 hours ago, Contrarian said:

The big picture: Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who is fighting to become speaker of the House, is the third House GOP leader to work with McConnell since he became leader in 2007.

Just quickly about this: 

GOP revolt blocks McCarthy from winning House speaker on first ballot

https://www.axios.com/2023/01/03/kevin-mccarthy-speaker-vote

and McConnell's speech: 

[robosmith]

26 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

He is a good guy for his ideology as much as Ted Kennedy was for his ideology. 

He is not a good guy for you, because you are a liberal probably from California too 😎😅

As someone that is watching this as spectator from Canada, I would say that what McConnell did with the Supreme Court will be his legacy for conservatives in America. 

Everything else is just sour grapes from the opposite side. He shaped the court for generations to come and still was not enough for Trump and his football hooligans followers.

In my opinion he leaves politics as a winner. After some years, people will even forget his other minor scandals. 

NO ONE will forget his extreme HYPOCRISY of breaking his OWN (stated) "RULES" for political expediency.

[Contrarian]

29 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

and McConnell's speech: 

@sharkmanyou once told me because I use mainstream sources, I am brainwashed. I think the term you used was birds of the same type fly the same way, I don't remember your rant. 

I could not help but to mention that your side is the same. You are brainwashed too. 

Even though this man did so much for the Republican party, just click on the video and scroll down to the comments section and see what the Trump fans there are saying about a symbol of the Republican party, they use the same word that is programmed in all Trump fans: "RINO". 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gAVoQZY_SQ

Edited January 3 by Contrarian

[Contrarian]

47 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

Just quickly about this: 

GOP revolt blocks McCarthy from winning House speaker on first ballot

https://www.axios.com/2023/01/03/kevin-mccarthy-speaker-vote

and McConnell's speech: 

Apparently things got heated at the GOP meeting. 

2 journalists reported that Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado Cursed at McCarthy's Last Minute Plea.

---> She yelled "bulls***" in response to McCarthy's speech.

https://www.newsweek.com/lauren-boebert-curses-mccarthy-last-minute-plea-gop-meeting-1771001

Edited January 3 by Contrarian

[robosmith]

39 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

@sharkmanyou once told me because I use mainstream sources, I am brainwashed. I think the term you used was birds of the same type fly the same way, I don't remember your rant. 

I could not help but to mention that your side is the same. You are brainwashed too. 

Even though this man did so much for the Republican party, just click on the video and scroll down to the comments section and see what the Trump fans there are saying about a symbol of the Republican party, they use the same word that is programmed in all Trump fans: "RINO". 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gAVoQZY_SQ

RINO used to mean not adhering to conservative principles, but Trump has convinced HIS CULT that it NOW means not having allegiance to Trump.

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, Contrarian said:

He is a good guy for his ideology as much as Ted Kennedy was for his ideology. 

He is not a good guy for you, because you are a liberal probably from California too 😎😅

As someone that is watching this as spectator from Canada, I would say that what McConnell did with the Supreme Court will be his legacy for conservatives in America. 

Everything else is just sour grapes from the opposite side. He shaped the court for generations to come and still was not enough for Trump and his football hooligans followers.

In my opinion he leaves politics as a winner. After some years, people will even forget his other minor scandals. 

No, I don't think he's a bad guy because he's "on the other team." I think he's played a major part in the end of bipartisan cooperation. It wasn't so long ago that something like McCain-Feingold was possible, or Kennedy and Hatch on the ADA. 

We used to measure bipartisan triumphs as among the finest legislative accomplishments, but part of McConnel's recipe for "success" is down and dirty partisan foul play. Or in Canadian terms, an Ulf Samuelsson type, lol.  The SCOTUS appointments are the most visible and egregious, but he plays dirty as a matter of course. He puts party before country regularly. Think back to when Obama first took office in an incredibly dark time for the US, in the midst of the great recession and at risk of worse, and instead of rallying together McConnell announced that making Obama a one-term president was his top priority, and then tried his best to obstruct his way to that goal. Pulling America back from the brink should have been his priority, but it wasn't. 

Or consider the way he tolerated ALMOST any about of nonsense from Trump. He was one of the few Republicans in a position of power to stand up to that creep, but he enabled his excesses and let him run wild. He calculated that party unity and a rabid base was more important than his responsibility to country and constitution. He allowed Trump to fester. -- I think in retrospect he regrets it, but not out of a sense of duty (he had plenty of chances to do the right things) but rather because it got so out of hand that Trump damaged the  republican brand, and that's what McConnell really care most about. I suspect he wonders every day if things wouldn't have turned out better if they had convicted at the first impeachment and hit the reset button with Pence or another candidate before the 2020 elections.

Anyway, I don't think he's a bad guy because he's a Republican. I judge him a bad guy because he's a Republican first and an American second, and it's caused a lot of harm to the country, not the least of which is accelerating the current state of hyperpartisan polarization.

[Nationalist]

Mitch McConnell is a prince of swamp creatures and needs to be disposed of.

[Infidel Dog]

44 minutes ago, Hodad said:

The SCOTUS appointments are the most visible and egregious,

I'm not a McConnell fan at all. In fact, whatever the opposite of that of is, that's what I am.

But you lose me when you seem to be wanting Merrick Garland for the Supreme court. We dodged such a scary bullet with that one. Congratulations for doing your job for once in your life, McConnell.

Edited January 3 by Infidel Dog

[sharkman]

Funny how old politicians won’t retire, but just hang on to the reins of power.  Pelosi, McConnell and many others.  It’s because they are addicted to power, and that’s the very worst kind of politician there is.

There really should be term limits for these addicts.

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, Infidel Dog said:

I'm not a McConnell fan at all. In fact, whatever the opposite of that of is, that's what I am.

But you lose me when you seem to be wanting Merrick Garland for the Supreme court. We dodged such a scary bullet with that one. Congratulations for doing your job for once in your life, McConnell.

I think there's a lot of retrospective bias based on his new job. Don't forget that Garland was well liked by Republicans and would have been approved easily in an open vote. In fact, that was the whole point of nominating an extraordinarily qualified centrist. Obama didn't have time for a liberal justice to be rejected, so he nominated someone everyone could agree on easily: Garland. 

I don't think you dodged any kind of bullet. As a jurist, Garland was exactly as advertised. He just has a different job now.

McConnell did manage to get you someone *more* conservative, so his plan worked, but the cost has been tremendous.

 

Edited January 4 by Hodad

[Infidel Dog]

4 hours ago, Hodad said:

I think there's a lot of retrospective bias based on his new job. Don't forget that Garland was well liked by Republicans

I think I'll hold off on taking your opinion as gospel on what Republicans feel, think and "like."

Just going by my own memory the Republicans I was reading at the time seemed pretty contend to avoid Garland as a Supreme court justice. Also they're quite pleased today with getting Neal Gorsuch in his stead.

No offence but I prefer the opinion of an actual Republican (Notice I didn't say RINO) to yours on what Republicans like. 

Here's one:

"

A.G., Garland seems to know no restraint nor hesitancy in his willingness to use his position and pen as platform to launch politically motivated attacks against all the president’s men and women in opposition.  He spares no manner of wrathful tactic to gut the constitutional rights and domestic tranquility of his targets, and to subdue, intimidate, and ultimately destroy them. A willingness that has stretched its net so wide or high, as to harass a former and potential future president or a fervent pro-life father of seven.

As Supreme Court Justice, how much more willing would Garland have been to adopt a “Living Constitution” judicial philosophy that kills the Constitution by its slow gutting by a thousand knives?

Yes, Merrick Garland’s tenure as Attorney General, has more than made up for any slight he may have suffered by not having been given an opportunity to demonstrate and defend before the Senate his qualifications, and the suitability of his nomination to the Supreme Court.

The left may be apt to argue that it was the slight that made the man. I would rebut in that case, that it is Garland the man, who made the slight into a vendetta not only against Republicans, but against the Constitution and rule of law.

In retrospect, Garland’s time at Justice, thus far, much more than any senate hearings could have ever revealed, demonstrates just how unjust he is willing to be to politicize a supposed apolitical institution, whether it be the Department of Justice, much less the Supreme Court of the United States.

For this dodged bullet to the heart of the Constitution and rule of law, for keeping Merrick Garland off the Supreme Court, conservatives, indeed every American, should long remember Mitch McConnell’s single greatest service to his country."

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/10/merrick_garlands_targeting_of_conservatives_reveals_a_bullet_dodged.html

 

[Hodad]

53 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

I think I'll hold off on taking your opinion as gospel on what Republicans feel, think and "like."

Just going by my own memory the Republicans I was reading at the time seemed pretty contend to avoid Garland as a Supreme court justice. Also they're quite pleased today with getting Neal Gorsuch in his stead.

No offence but I prefer the opinion of an actual Republican (Notice I didn't say RINO) to yours on what Republicans like. 

Here's one:

"

A.G., Garland seems to know no restraint nor hesitancy in his willingness to use his position and pen as platform to launch politically motivated attacks against all the president’s men and women in opposition.  He spares no manner of wrathful tactic to gut the constitutional rights and domestic tranquility of his targets, and to subdue, intimidate, and ultimately destroy them. A willingness that has stretched its net so wide or high, as to harass a former and potential future president or a fervent pro-life father of seven.

As Supreme Court Justice, how much more willing would Garland have been to adopt a “Living Constitution” judicial philosophy that kills the Constitution by its slow gutting by a thousand knives?

Yes, Merrick Garland’s tenure as Attorney General, has more than made up for any slight he may have suffered by not having been given an opportunity to demonstrate and defend before the Senate his qualifications, and the suitability of his nomination to the Supreme Court.

The left may be apt to argue that it was the slight that made the man. I would rebut in that case, that it is Garland the man, who made the slight into a vendetta not only against Republicans, but against the Constitution and rule of law.

In retrospect, Garland’s time at Justice, thus far, much more than any senate hearings could have ever revealed, demonstrates just how unjust he is willing to be to politicize a supposed apolitical institution, whether it be the Department of Justice, much less the Supreme Court of the United States.

For this dodged bullet to the heart of the Constitution and rule of law, for keeping Merrick Garland off the Supreme Court, conservatives, indeed every American, should long remember Mitch McConnell’s single greatest service to his country."

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/10/merrick_garlands_targeting_of_conservatives_reveals_a_bullet_dodged.html

 

Honestly, the audacity to throw the constitution at Garland, who was robbed of his seat on the SCOTUS through pure constitutional misconduct -- and then to toss in "apolitical position" following Barr -- is pretty brassy.

But at any rate, this is again retrospective. It's not simply my opinion or inference that Republicans liked Garland. Stalwart Republicans like Hatch and McCain were on record in support of Garland at the time.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/03/16/politics/merrick-garland-republicans-praise/index.html

And other judges, including John Roberts thought very highly of him. He was a slam dunk confirmation if McConnell hadn't stolen the seat. He rolled the dice and won. The bastard.

 

 

Edited January 4 by Hodad

[Infidel Dog]

Oh well, if CNN says all the Republicans have or had massive love on for Merrick Garland it's gotta be true. Not.

Anybody wanting a good laugh but not wanting to click on CNN, here's the Republican Merrick Garland fanboys Hodad and CNN were able to find:

"Susan Collins, Orrin Hatch, Jim Inhofe, John McCain and Pat Roberts." 

 I think Neal Gorsuch defended Garland's judicial decisions one time a long time ago. So, maybe that's what Hodad means by there's something wrong with Neal.

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, Infidel Dog said:

Oh well, if CNN says all the Republicans have or had massive love on for Merrick Garland it's gotta be true. Not.

Anybody wanting a good laugh but not wanting to click on CNN, here's the Republican Merrick Garland fanboys Hodad and CNN were able to find:

"Susan Collins, Orrin Hatch, Jim Inhofe, John McCain and Pat Roberts." 

 I think Neal Gorsuch defended Garland's judicial decisions one time a long time ago. So, maybe that's what Hodad means by there's something wrong with Neal.

Those folks listed represent close to 200 years of Republican legislative leadership, including a recent Republican presidential nominee. Again, I'd point out how radicalized you have become if that's not Republican enough for you. Pretty crazy.

[Infidel Dog]

RINOs and a Bush republican.

They like the guy who sends the law after Parents for not wanting their kids raped by trannies in the school washroom, are they?

Figures.

Kind of surprised Romney isn't on there though.