NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
The Cincinnati Bengals missed the playoffs the past two seasons. They finished 9-8 both years, despite a loaded offense headed by quarterback Joe Burrow (when healthy).
During the offseason, the Bengals refused to re-sign All-Pro defensive end Trey Hendrickson. He led the league in sacks last season with 17.5. The Bengals considered trading Hendrickson. They then grudgingly signed him to a year-long contract just before the first game.
Cincinnati drafted defensive end Shemar Stewart of Texas A&M in the first round last spring. But then the Bengals and Stewart tussled over a contract.
TIT FOR TAT: HOUSE CENSURES ARE BECOMING ‘SNAP’ SOLUTIONS
The Bengals have been less parsimonious in recent years when doling out the dollars to top-flight players. But owner Mike Brown has a miserly reputation. And despite a talent-laden roster, the Bengals are peerless in mediocrity. They have never won the Super Bowl. That fuels a narrative about the franchise.
Stewart summed up the Bengals when speaking to Sports Illustrated:
“Y’all just want to win arguments (more) than winning games,” he declared.
“Arguments” and “games” are now afoot in Washington, D.C. over avoiding a government shutdown next week.
The question is what counts as winning an “argument” and what constitutes prevailing in a “game.” Both Republicans and Democrats can compete in both categories over the next few days. A government funding deadline looms at 11:59:59 p.m. ET Tuesday night. In fact, both sides might secure victories in the argument category. But marshaling a true title in the win column is an altogether different enterprise. Moreover, this tournament’s rules don’t dictate that one side emerges victorious and the other loses. In fact, both sides could execute losing campaigns.
DEMOCRATS SKIP CHARLIE KIRK ARIZONA MEMORIAL AFTER 58 VOTE AGAINST HOUSE RESOLUTION
That said, do the sides have more interest in echoing the Cincinnati Bengals and winning “arguments?” Or would they rather win “games” and avert a government shutdown.
“I don’t have any meetings or any scheduling updates for you today,” said White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt at the briefing early Monday afternoon.
But there was a flicker of hope a few hours later.
Word came that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., would head to the White House on Thursday to meet with President Donald Trump. Neither leader has huddled with the president since he took office in January. But one wasn’t quite sure what this session might accomplish.
“We want a clean funding extension to keep the government open. That’s all we’re advocating for,” said Leavitt.
Democrats pushed for something else. They advocated a renewal of subsidies to defray the cost of Obamacare. The price tag for health care coverage for millions of Americans is set to skyrocket early next year unless Congress intervenes. Democrats want to dial back other health care reductions which were part of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill – passed by Congress earlier this summer. Democrats also insist on assurances that the president won’t claw back any money for programs already doled out by Congress. Finally, Democrats want the administration to reinstate dollars cut from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
The House is out of session this week – and prospectively until October 7 – after passing a GOP-backed interim spending plan late last week. But House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., materialized at the Capitol early Tuesday morning.
Johnson told Fox News he was skeptical that a meeting between President Trump, Schumer and Jeffries “is necessary.” But the Speaker noted that he would attend the Oval Office conclave.
“Why would I not be there? This is the legislative branch communicating with the executive branch. If there is such a meeting with the leaders, then (Senate Majority Leader) John Thune, R-S.D., and I will certainly be a part of it,” said Johnson.
It was news that Johnson and Thune were set to be part of a meeting with the president on government funding. But it would have been news to Johnson that Trump nixed the meeting. Moments later, Trump posted a lengthy screed to Truth Social, scrubbing the session.
“I have decided that no meeting with their Congressional Leaders could possibly be productive,” he wrote.
He argued that the Democratic request would provide “free healthcare for Illegal Aliens,” along with government funded “Transgender surgery for minors.” He also said the Democrats proposal would “allow men to play in women’s sports, and essentially create Transgender operations for everybody.”
It’s not clear where the provisions the president cited lie in the Democratic counteroffer. But the fact of the matter is that the government will shutter early next Wednesday morning unless the Senate can secure Democratic votes to overcome a filibuster. The House passed an interim bill renewing funding at current levels last week. Only one Democrat, Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine, voted “yea.”
But the Senate is a different animal. Republicans only have 53 votes there. Sixty votes are necessary to crack a filibuster. So if Democrats don’t accede to the GOP demands, there’s a shutdown. And, by contrast, if Republicans refuse to grant Democrats their wishes, there’s a shutdown.
Avoiding a shutdown could qualify as winning “games.” But we’re not certain if the sides are interested in that sweepstakes just yet.
“The statement that Donald Trump issued today was unhinged,” said Jeffries, adding that “Trump always chickens out.”
“Today seems to be tantrum day for Donald Trump,” said Schumer. “He just ain’t up to it. He runs away before the negotiations even begin.”
Since the House greenlighted its interim bill, Johnson cut everyone loose – cancelling scheduled session days next week when the House could at least be in a position to wrangle with any spending bill which comes over from the Senate. But Republicans are adamant that it’s the House bill or nothing.
“You’re not planning to bring the House back at any stage now?” I asked Johnson.
“The House is on district work period right now. We got our work done in the House. We got it done early with regard to the funding. People have a lot to do back in their districts. So we’re on the ready at any time. But the plan would be to come back when it’s necessary. But the current plan is to not have session days on September 29 and 30th,” he said.
“Is that a bad look if the House is not here and the government shuts down despite what you did?” I countered.
“The government would not shut down until the earliest, October 1st,” replied Johnson, slightly cracking open the door to a potential recall. “But if Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries decide to shut the government down, they’ve created the problem.”
So, we’re less than a week before a possible government shutdown. Seemingly each September, just before the end of the fiscal year, the chances of a government shutdown are “high” and there’s almost no way to avert a shutdown. Yet nearly each time, Democrats and Republicans, the House and Senate, figure out a way to stave off a shutdown at the last minute. In fact, that might be the case this time. But the calculus is different, with the House nowhere to be found, and the Senate left with just the House bill. That’s only exacerbated by a lack of negotiations.
One can only imagine the arguments which may have emanated from the Oval Office had Trump huddled with Jeffries and Schumer this week. They may have viewed a televised meeting with the president as the perfect forum to skirmish. Democrats have struggled for months to demonstrate to their base that they’re “fighting.” That said, Trump may have been ready for a tilt, ala his verbal combat with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in February. And who can forget former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., storming out of a meeting with Trump during his first term?
At this stage, everyone is trying to win arguments. Not games. And we’ll truly know if they lost the game when the government’s new fiscal year begins at 12:00:01 a.m. ET next Wednesday.
Read the full article here
