Did anyone hear the rummor that Tom Joyner discuss this morning?

[Tim4319]

Rummor has it that since black House members that held their position the longest and are part of the magority party will head the committees on the Hill. There is suppose to be a vote that will reverse that rule in order not to have John Conyers, Charlie Rangel, Maxine Water, amoungst others not to head those departments prior to the Dems officially taking over the House. How true is this?

[goclark]

1. This should be all over the Conyers blog and we must not let this happen

[gully]

3. It's not true.

.

[goclark]

8. Link to it not being true please

It has been my experience that Tom Joyner, good friend of Tavis Smiley, does not joke about things like this~

I checked his website and didn't see it mentioned.

If America ever wants to see African Americans and a huge majority of those who stand for JUSTICE "tell it like it is" they sure better not even attempt to go in this direction.

I need more links to this claim.

[gully]

12. Link to it being true please.

It's like asking for a link to the debunking of the sky is pink rumor.

[goclark]

17. Well I'm making calls and sending email's now

to find out it's validity.

[gully]

15. By the way this white American would be pissed as hell, and just in case

I had words with BOTH of Pelosi's offices to this effect.

[gully]

2. I highly doubt this is true.

It would be not only ignorant, but unjust/unwarranted.

[sharp_stick]

4. When the Dem's take over in January

they can appoint anyone they want to head committees if I'm not mistaken. The repukes can change any rules they want but they'll still be in the minority come January.

Damn, it feels good to use the words repuke and minority in the same breath doesn't it?

On edit: Fixed typos

[KingFlorez]

5. That doesn't sound true

The Republicans can change rules before, but once the Democrats assume power they can appoint whomever they want to chair the committees.

[zyguh]

6. They wont dare make rules changes like that at this point

Because if they do we can change the rules to say only members of the majority party are allowed to serve on any committees at all.

We wouldnt do that, of course, because for one thing we know we will be in the minority at some future point.(and because we arent scum-wads like them).

They wont make changes to cause us trouble because we can make their lives hell in two months.

[Joe Chi Minh]

10. I agree. It would be impolitic. And that's the worst crime

politicians can commit and remain viable. It would be madness.

[enid602]

7. consideration

Conyers, Rangel and Waters should not get consideration based on seniority alone, but rather should be considered for these posts because they were practically alone in standing up to Bushco and calling for oversight. To not give them top spots would be an insult.

[BrotherBuzz]

9. Is this just more wishful thinking from across the isle?

Ain't gonna happen. :rofl:

[Joe Chi Minh]

11. Good thinking. Divide and rule.

[charlie]

13. A vote to reverse the rule?

Repubs tossed the seniority rule over a decade ago. As far as I know, if the Dems want to enforce seniority as the preeminent consideration for committee assignments, they'll have to vote to change it back.

[NYYFan]

14. I heard this- and was confused

I hope this isn't true. If it is- the Covenant With Black America is getting off on a bad foot. . .

[journalist3072]

16. Tom also mentioned that...

I was listening to Tom when he mentioned this.

He also said it was interesting that when Jane Harman left Congress and then returned, they let her have her seniority and old committee assigments back.

But when Cynthia McKinney left Congress and returned, she in effect had to start over. They didn't do the same for her.

We really must begin to hold the Dems accountable for stuff like this.