Thread by @jbf1755

1/ Okay folks.

A quick-and-dirty thread on behaving badly in Congress.

<clears throat>

The outrage at the Ripping Episode at the end of the #SOTU last night is something to see.

Yes. It had power.
Yes. It sent a message that is sure to inflame some and delight others.

2/ But to claim that the Ripping Episode is THE WORST THING EVER TO HAPPEN IN CONGRESS?
.
.

.
.
Take a little walk with me.

(I just noticed that I'm wearing two pairs of glasses)

3/ Members of Congress have been smacking at each other since the dawn of the republic. For example, in 1798, two congressmen (Roger Griswold and Matthew Lyon) went at each other with a cane and fireplace tongs.

They were political opponents. The spat was partisan & political.

4/ There has been MUCH political mayhem since the 1790s. Canings. Open threats and insults. Pistols. Fistfights. Mass brawls.

(For more, read my most recent book: The Field of Blood: Violence in Congress & the Road to Civil War. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming)

5/ Some congressional displays & outbursts were born of a temper flash more than anything else. They were somewhat spontaneous.

Some wasn't spontaneous.

Some such displays were acted out on the floor of Congress to send a message. The Ripping Episode falls in that category.

6/ BUT not all messages are equal. Some such displays are intended to intimidate and silence the opposition. Some seemingly dangle the possibility of violence.

There was no inherent threat behind the Ripping.
Just a statement.

7/ To see congressional "acting out" as an intended threat, look to the US Congress in the 1840s & 1850s. Particularly in the 1850s, Southerners routinely insulted & threatened opponents (often in the House) before a possibly nat'l audience.

Their power wasn't in their punch.

8/ Members of Congress who deliberately insulted or threatened their opponents on the floor of Congress did it knowing that it would leave their victim two options:

Public humiliation or a fight.

The threat of violence was hovering nearby, intimidating some & silencing others.

9/ More coming soon....

9/ People called such congressional intimidation "bullying," and it had a brutal power.

What kind of power? Consider the recent outing of the whistleblower.

There was no violence. No open threat. Just the display of a name in the Senate.

10/ Now consider the impact of displaying the whistleblower's name.

It would invite anger, perhaps even threats.

It might prevent future whistleblowers from stepping forward with evidence of crime or corruption.

Indeed, that was the point.

11/ Displaying the whistleblower's name was bullying, pure and simple. An open threat.

So spare me the hysterics about the Ripping Episode as THE WORST THING EVER TO HAPPEN IN CONGRESS.

There are far worse things -- & far more dangerous things -- being displayed in Congress.

I may have broken this thread. (Aargh.) Check my tweets for its continuation. It begins -- once again -- at number 9.