Marjorie Taylor Greene clashes with Ocasio-Cortez in chaotic hearing
Summary
TLDRThe transcript captures a chaotic and heated exchange during a committee meeting, highlighting the breakdown of decorum and the personal attacks that have become all too common in political discourse. Members of the committee engage in ad hominem insults, with accusations of inappropriate conduct and calls for apologies. The discussion devolves into a debate about the relevance of personal comments and the impact on the committee's ability to function effectively. The lack of focus on substantive issues and the prevalence of personal attacks underscore the challenges facing the legislative process and the need for a return to civility and compromise.
Takeaways
- 🗣️ The script depicts a chaotic committee meeting with heated exchanges and personal attacks among members.
- 👥 There is a clear lack of decorum and respect for parliamentary procedure, with members speaking over each other and ignoring the chair's calls for order.
- 🤬 Personal attacks are made, focusing on appearances rather than policy or political differences, highlighting a departure from substantive debate.
- 🚫 The committee chair struggles to maintain control, with members challenging his rulings and authority.
- 📢 A member's words are ordered to be struck from the record due to inappropriate personal comments, indicating a breach of conduct.
- 🙅♀️ One member refuses to apologize for her comments, further escalating the tension and conflict within the committee.
- 🤔 There is a call for an apology and a return to respectful discourse, emphasizing the importance of maintaining professional standards in political debate.
- 👉 The script suggests a broader issue with the current state of the House of Representatives, characterized by unproductivity and a lack of focus on substantive issues.
- 🎪 The behavior of the committee members is likened to a circus, indicating a loss of seriousness and professionalism in political discourse.
- 👎 The public is criticized for electing individuals who contribute to this dysfunction, suggesting a need for voters to prioritize compromise and results over personal celebrity or opposition.
- 🔄 The script implies a need for a return to traditional methods of governance, where lawmakers focus on building consensus and passing legislation to address the nation's problems.
Q & A
What is the primary issue being discussed in the committee meeting?
-The primary issue discussed in the committee meeting is the conduct of the members, particularly the inappropriate personal attacks and insults exchanged between them, which is causing a disruption in the proceedings.
Who is Mr. Green and what is his role in the meeting?
-Mr. Green is a member of the committee who is recognized to speak during the meeting. He is involved in the discussions and motions concerning the conduct of other members.
What does Ms. Greene accuse the Democrats of employing?
-Ms. Greene makes an inflammatory and unclear statement, asking if any Democrats on the committee are employing 'judge Martians,' which seems to be a non-sequitur and is not directly related to the main discussion.
What is the significance of the term 'porn star' in the context of this meeting?
-The term 'porn star' is used in a derogatory manner, seemingly as an insult directed towards another member, contributing to the unprofessionalism and personal attacks within the committee meeting.
Why does Mr. Lynch raise a point of order?
-Mr. Lynch raises a point of order to question the conduct of the chairman in connection with the hearing, specifically regarding fundraising activities, and whether it should be referred to the Ethics Committee.
What is the motion made by Mr. Lynch regarding Ms. Greene's words?
-Mr. Lynch moves to take down Ms. Greene's words, which he deems unacceptable, and suggests that her comments are an abuse of the committee's proceedings.
What does Ms. Greene agree to do regarding her words in the meeting?
-Ms. Greene agrees to strike her words from the record, but she does not apologize for her comments, maintaining her stance despite the objections from other members.
What is the objection made by Mr. Raskin?
-Mr. Raskin objects to Ms. Greene's request to strike her words, arguing that she should also offer a sincere apology for her personal attacks against another member.
What is the underlying problem discussed regarding the behavior of the committee members?
-The underlying problem discussed is the unprofessional and personal nature of the attacks between members, which is seen as contrary to the rules of the House of Representatives and detrimental to the functioning of the committee.
How does the speaker describe the current state of the House of Representatives?
-The speaker describes the current state of the House of Representatives as chaotic, unproductive, and resembling a circus, with members focusing on personal attacks rather than substantive policy discussions.
What is the role of leadership in the dysfunction observed in the committee meeting?
-Leadership, as represented by the chairman in this case, plays a crucial role in the dysfunction observed. The chairman's inability to control the proceedings and maintain order contributes to the chaos and unprofessional behavior of the committee members.
What is the impact of the current political culture on the functioning of Congress?
-The current political culture, which does not allow for middle-out coalitions or compromise, has led to a Congress that is remarkably unproductive and unable to address pressing issues facing Americans.
What does the speaker suggest about the career paths of members of Congress?
-The speaker suggests that there used to be a career path in Congress where members would work diligently, build reputations, and pass laws. However, the current culture has shifted towards seeking celebrity and personal attention rather than focusing on legislative work.
Outlines
🗣️ Heated Exchange in Committee Meeting
The first paragraph depicts a chaotic committee meeting where members are arguing and interrupting each other. The discussion involves personal attacks, such as comments on someone's appearance, and accusations of misconduct. There are attempts to restore order, with references to points of order and motions to strike words from the record. The chairman tries to maintain control, but the meeting is marked by disorder and a lack of decorum, highlighting a breakdown in the committee's proceedings.
😤 Dysfunction and Personal Attacks in Congress
The second paragraph discusses the broader implications of the disarray witnessed in the committee meeting. It points out the unprofessional behavior and personal attacks among members, which detract from the substantive issues that should be the focus of their work. The speaker laments the current state of the House of Representatives, noting the lack of productivity and the circus-like atmosphere. The paragraph also touches on the role of leadership and the impact of a lack of compromise, suggesting that the current political climate discourages cooperation and fosters division.
🏛️ The Erosion of Bipartisan Cooperation
The third paragraph delves into the historical context of congressional operations, contrasting the past with the present. It describes a time when a Democratic speaker could build a working majority by including members from both parties, fostering a more cooperative environment. The paragraph suggests that the current political culture no longer supports this middle-out approach, leading to a more polarized and less effective legislative body.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Committee
💡Democrats
💡Conduct
💡Point of Order
💡Parliamentarian
💡Ethics Committee
💡Personalities
💡Ad Hominem
💡Unanimous Consent
💡Productivity
💡Compromise
💡Majority
💡Speaker
Highlights
A heated exchange occurs between committee members, with personal attacks and name-calling.
Rep. Greene is accused of making inappropriate comments about another member's appearance.
A motion is made to strike Rep. Greene's words from the record, which she agrees to.
Rep. Raskin objects, calling for an apology from Rep. Greene for her personal attack.
Rep. Greene refuses to apologize, saying she will never apologize for her words.
The committee devolves into chaos, with members yelling and talking over each other.
The chairman struggles to maintain order, citing his difficulty hearing due to deafness.
Rep. Lynch raises a point of order, questioning the chairman's conduct in connection with the hearing.
The committee discusses the appropriateness of personal attacks and the need for decorum.
The lack of productivity in Congress is lamented, with members prioritizing personal attacks over policy debates.
The current political culture is criticized for not allowing for compromise and bipartisan coalitions.
The rise of celebrity and social media influence in politics is discussed, with concerns about its impact on the legislative process.
Rep. Ocasio-Cortez is commended for her knowledge of committee rules and her preparedness during hearings.
The importance of compromise in achieving legislative results is emphasized, but it is noted that voters often oppose compromise.
The decline in the reputation of Congress and the rise of a "clown show" are lamented.
Concerns are raised about the unprofessional behavior of elected officials and its impact on the public's perception of Congress.
The lack of action on key issues facing Americans, such as healthcare and climate change, is criticized.
The need for leadership to restore order and focus on policy debates rather than personal attacks is emphasized.
Transcripts
as any other members seek recognition.
I'd say it recognizes Mr. Green.
I'd like to know
if any of the Democrats on this committee
are employing judge Martians.
Daughter.
Oh, please
tell me what that has to do
with Merrick Garland.
Is she a porn star?
Oh, Goldman. That's right.
He's advising. Okay.
There was an.
Do you.
Do you know we're here for.
You know we're here.
I want you know what you're here for.
Well, you don't want to talk about.
I think your fake eyelashes
are messing up.
Ain't nothing out of this
order, Mr.
Chairman.
Beneath even more,
you gave the order of your committee.
Order, please.
This is a point of order.
We have a point of order.
Mr. Lynch, state your point.
Mr.
Chairman,
I would just like to
ask the parliamentarian
if your conduct here in raising money
in connection with this hearing
is referable to the Ethics Committee.
Within this hearing
is a motion in order to refer
your conduct
and your abuse of.
It's not a point of order.
I do have a point of order
and I would like to move to
to take down Ms..
Greene's words.
That is absolutely unacceptable.
How dare you
suspend meetings of another person?
Are your feelings her words down?
Oh. Oh, girl. Baby girl.
Oh, really?
Don't even play, baby girl.
I don't.
We are going to move
and we're going to take your words down.
I second that motion.
Mr.
Green, do you wish to strike your words?
I have 4 minutes and 21 seconds to speak.
I think we have to do the motion first.
And then unless there's another motion,
then.
Then you'll be recognized again.
But I believe there's
another motion coming.
So you agree to strike your words?
Yeah. Okay.
Ms.. Green agrees to strike her words.
I believe.
I don't know.
Okay, hold on.
Then after Mr.
Page, you'll be recognized.
I'm not apologizing.
Okay. Reserve the right to your way.
I am not apologizing.
Let's go. Come on, guys.
Why don't you debate me?
Mr. Chairman.
The minority seldom ever.
You're not. Yeah, you're not.
You don't have enough
intelligent recognizes, Mr.
Perry. Okay.
Move to strike. Move!
Move!
This morning, ladies words again.
Ms..
GREENE, do you ask unanimous consent?
Do you agree to unanimous consent
to strike your words?
I repeat again for the second time.
Yes.
I'll use my words,
but I'm not apologizing
without objection,
So Miss Green asked unanimous consent
to strike her words.
Mr. Raskin objected.
I'm going to recognize Mr.
Raskin for his objection.
We're not counting against.
Mr.
Green has 4 minutes and 21 seconds left.
This will not count against your time.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I reserve the right to object
because the understanding of the minority
is that the general lady from Georgia
would move to take her words down
and strike her words, and to offer
sincere apology
for having engaged
in personalities against another member,
offending her personal appearance
and insulting her.
We don't do that in this committee.
And I think the major problem was that
we allowed pornography in this committee
and we've gone down a bad road.
But in any event,
we should not allow face to face
ad hominem insults.
It's totally contrary to the rules
of the House of Representatives.
And I would ask Ms..
GREENE
if she would just make the apology.
It's not that complicated.
We don't want to get into face
to face insults.
You will never get an apology out of me.
And
then I object.
Then I object. The Raskin's objects.
you know,
I think we don't want to see
a complete dissent
of our committee and the verbatim quote,
the verbatim
quote of the general lady was,
I think your fake eyelashes
were messing up your reading.
That is what she said.
I think you're fake.
And that that's obviously
engaging in personalities.
It's an ad hominem attack.
And I would just ask
every member
of this committee
in a fair minded way,
would you want to be talked to
in that way
about your personal appearance
by another member of the committee?
Because what we're doing
is we're setting standards going forward.
I'm just curious,
just to better understand your ruling.
If someone on this committee
then starts talking about somebodies
beliefs, blond, bad built, butch body
that would not be engaging
in personalities. Correct? What now?
Chairman?
I make
I make a motion to strike those words.
I don't think that's one part of it.
I find clarification on what quorum is.
You just said we're not going to
we're not going to do this
like you guys earlier.
Literally, you just voted to do it.
A person.
You voted you in order.
I'm trying to get clarification.
Look at calm down.
Calm down.
No, no, no, because this is what you do.
Proceed. I'm sorry.
You're not recognize Mr..
I hear you with your yelling.
Oh, right on down.
No, please don't tell me to calm down
because y'all have gone down in there.
You're out of control telling me
if I don't have a chairman.
Mr. Chairman.
Who wants to?
Who wants to take a crack at this?
I mean, these people are elected.
But this is good for the whole thing
we're talking about all day today.
But where where, how far have we come?
And like, why is this?
Why are these people even
except what this is like,
mean it's disgusting that
this is how they're behaving
and why are they attacking
each other personally?
They have enough to attack
each other on their views.
They don't need to attack each other
on their eyelashes and their hair. Here.
What's depressing about this is that it's
not that unusual
for the house these days.
I mean,
whether it was Kevin McCarthy's
many rounds to get elected
speaker, people
getting in each other's faces,
I mean, they almost
started hating each other during that.
And so it's not just these three women.
I've watched the men behave.
I'm calling each other names.
The house is in absolute chaos.
And we have been electing
a lot of clowns in this country.
And we are getting a circus.
I'm sure that it
has always been true there.
How clowns in the House
of Representatives.
There also used to be a career path
where you put your head down.
You did the work,
your mask, maxims in your head,
you built a staff,
you built a reputation,
you built partnerships,
and you passed laws,
which is what you were there to do.
And this is the
the comic and eye catching
side of
of the problem
with the Congress of the past few years,
which is they're remarkably unproductive.
And, you know,
when you think about problems
that Americans have from
the cost of nursing home
care to how to get health
insurance, to climate change, to
are the taxes too high
to the debates as we have
this all party consensus
that is building in favor
of more protectionism
and trying to enrich ourselves
by keeping out foreign goods,
that these are things
that you would think
that the House of Representatives
should be having a voice on.
But laws don't get passed.
This stuff happens
and so this
you can see and it gives you an
I mean,
it's important as a clue
to all the things that you don't see
because they are not happening.
One thing about this, too,
is that it does come down to leadership.
I mean, James Comer,
this was his committee
that devolved into this back and forth.
Here was how he tried to explain
what happened.
I don't know if you notice the
I have two hearing aids.
I'm very deaf.
I'm not understanding.
Everybody's yelling.
I'm doing the best I can.
Can we not recognize Miss GREENE
and we not because of the rules
of the committee, Mr. Chair,
I sort of wonder how he didn't hear
this piece of it, which
we're not going to
we're not going to do this.
Look, you guys earlier literally just
voted to do the first thing you voted to
in order
not trying to get clarification
and yelling, oh, why on down?
Please don't tell me to calm down,
because y'all have gone down in there.
You're out of control.
Back
with them.
Meghan
I mean, it's like a circus.
Like a circus that people are screaming.
I mean, I guess
Comer couldn't blame his wife
because he didn't think of that
excuse fast enough to solve this problem.
That seems to be
what are blame people for.
I just don't understand how this is like
acceptable behavior
from our lawmakers
who need to be passing laws.
People actually
have issues in this country
and we need to have actual laws.
You know,
one of
these is an interesting about voters
are we ask about Congress a lot
and it's funny,
they very much want results,
but they do not want compromise.
And voters in this country
seem to have lost the plot,
that it requires
compromise to get results,
which is, I think, where you now
see people reaching
for sort of the strongman
authoritarian types,
because they have forgotten
that actually the way
this body is supposed to function
is by doing the hard work,
putting their heads
down, reaching a compromise
that makes everybody
a little bit unhappy
and a little bit happy.
And ultimately you get something done
for the American people.
And so people want things done.
They don't want them to compromise.
They want them to be in opposition
like that.
And that's why
we have all this dysfunction.
Yeah, well, I mean,
and to what you were saying, David, to
when celebrity seems to be the goal
of coming to Congress,
you end up in situations like this. Well,
I'll tell you, because
it has
a sort of an example of this,
because, look,
Marjorie Taylor GREENE has no choice
but to be Marjorie Taylor.
GREENE That's just
there's no
upper floor of the building there.
But Ocasio-Cortez
has potential to go
in a number of different ways
in her career
and that the incentives are pulling her
toward the Instagram influencer.
The viral moment,
the no, the no big bills path.
I will say she
Ocasio-Cortez is not always like this
in committee hearings,
but she was jumping in defending someone,
and she actually was the one
who knew the rules of the committee
was using them to her.
And she's usually very prepared
for these hearings.
But I think continue. Okay.
So she actually has a path.
I mean, I think
we're also coping with this is
this is a Congress
that doesn't have a majority
in the House of Representatives. And
the inhibitions, what might happen
under a different political culture
is this
The speaker would put together
a working majority.
You know,
half of the his party,
a third of the other party,
and build a majority from the center out.
But that is completely prohibited
by the culture of the modern House
of Representatives.
That's how action
things are often done in the past,
especially in the fifties and sixties,
when Partizanship was more blurry,
you would have these dysfunction
in coalition
of the center of moderate Democrat,
usually with a Democratic speaker
in those days,
always with the Democratic speaker.
But putting some
of the Democratic members
out to the margins,
putting many of the Republican members
out to the margins.
But our political culture
doesn't allow that middle out