I dislike writing about the antics of the Sinematic Senator but yesterday’s speech left me no choice. Veda Pierce Sinema took to the Senate floor to give a speech that was alternately deluded and dishonest. I would prefer to think she was lying about the process. I hate to think that any Democratic senator is that dumb.
It’s as if the Arizona Brat Fatale read Norm Ornstein’s recent piece about filibuster myths and learned all the wrong lessons from it. Deluded, dishonest, or dumb?
KTAR News Radio in Phoenix has posted a transcript of the Brat Fatale Speech. We begin with her ode to the voting rights bills. Let’s begin our exercise in quote and response.
And I strongly support and will continue to vote for legislative responses to address these state laws – including the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, that the Senate is currently considering.
I support these bills because they strengthen Americans’ access to the ballot box and they better ensure that Americans’ votes are counted fairly – it is through elections that Americans make their voices heard, select their representatives, and guide the future of our country and our communities.
She supports bills that cannot pass because of the 60-vote threshold. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised that someone who fancies herself a fashion plate would value style over substance. Deluded, dishonest, or dumb?
The debate over the Senate’s 60-vote threshold shines a light on our broader challenges.
There is no need for me to restate my long-standing support for the 60-vote threshold to pass legislation. There’s no need for me to restate its role protecting our country from wild reversals in federal policy.
She’s an elected official: repetition is the essence of communication. It’s a lame excuse for not explaining her position with clarity. Besides, she was against the filibuster before she was for it. Deluded, dishonest, or dumb?
American politics are cyclical and the granting of power in Washington, D.C. is exchanged regularly by the voters from one party to another.
This shift of power back and forth means the Senate’s 60-vote threshold has proved maddening to members of both political parties in recent years – viewed either as a weapon of obstruction, or a safety net to save the country from radical policies, depending on whether you serve in the majority or the minority.
In 2021, obstructionism is a Republican thing. Hell, it’s been that way since Bob Dole committed his caucus to oppose any health care reforms proposed by the Clinton administration. Of course, Dole’s move was deeply cynical, not deluded, dishonest, or dumb.
The 2013 decision by Senate Democrats to eliminate the 60-vote threshold for most judicial and presidential nominations led directly to a response in 2017 by Senate Republicans, who eliminated the threshold for Supreme Court nominees.
These short-sighted actions by both parties have led to our current American Judiciary and Supreme Court, which, as I stand here today, is considering questions regarding fundamental rights Americans have enjoyed for decades.
This is one of the few times that the Sinematic Senator has criticized both sides. Maybe she’s angling for a regular column at Politico. Deluded, dishonest, or dumb?
I share the disappointment of many that we have not found more support on the other side of the aisle for legislative responses to state-level voting restrictions.
I wish that were not the case – just as I wish there had been a more serious effort on the part of Democratic Party leaders to sit down with the other party and genuinely discuss how to re-forge common ground on these issues.
Joe Manchin wasted months trying to convince Republicans to support *his* ideas about voting rights. The only possible taker was the most honest member of the GOP caucus Lisa Murkowski who is a genuine maverick as opposed to a fake one like Veda Pierce Sinema.
I don’t need to pose the Three Ds question this time. D is for dishonesty.
The rest of the Brat Fatale Speech was boilerplate bipartisan babble and phony uplift. It’s the sort of speech a politician makes when blame shifting is their goal.
As to Sinema’s central point about filibuster’s alleged Kumbaya aspect, I’ll let the estimable Norm Ornstein refute her nonsense:
That may have been true in the distant past, but it has not been the case for a long time. The Senate changed the filibuster rule in 1975, from two-thirds of those present and voting to three-fifths of the entire Senate. The “present and voting” standard, by requiring senators to show up, put the burden on the minority; the absolute standard shifted the burden entirely to the majority. On most issues, when it is clear that a cloture vote (that is, a vote to end debate) would fail, there is no debate, which would only take up precious floor time. The minority can kill bills with few or no visible traces, and has no incentive for moderation or compromise. A good example: The House passed two bills last year requiring universal background checks on guns. Neither was even brought up in the Senate because Republicans made it clear the measures would die on filibusters.
Thanks, Norm. You’re a smart man, not deluded, dishonest, or dumb
This Brat Fatale speech flipped the bird at President Biden and Leader Schumer both of whom were negotiating in good faith. It’s increasingly obvious that the Sinematic Senator in incapable of doing anything in good faith. She’s a malignant narcissist, not a maverick. It proved fatale for the Biden agenda.
I feel like Mildred Pierce when she discovered her bratty kid Veda in bed with stepfather Monty. I want to scream some sense into Veda Pierce Sinema but it’s a waste of time. She only listens to her donors.
In the title and throughout this post I posed this question about the Brat Fatale: Deluded, dishonest, or dumb? I’ve come to think the Sinematic Senator is all three.
The last word goes to Sonic Youth who do some screaming of their own: