As I write, House Republicans have chosen yet another candidate for House Speaker, even as the selfsame House Republicans oil the guillotine that will chop off his head. As in Paris of 1794 or Moscow of 1936, the public execution of leaders has become a regular spectacle that defines today’s Republicans just as much as the show trials defined the Stalinists and the Terror defined Robespierre and his followers.

Minnesota Rep. Tom Emmer is the latest Republican lamb to the slaughter, having narrowly prevailed over Louisiana’s Mike Johnson in the party’s caucus today by a 117-97 vote. When his nomination comes to the floor, which could happen as early as this afternoon, it’s unlikely he can command the near-unanimity of support from his fellow GOPniks that he needs to become Speaker. As my colleague David Dayen has noted, Republicans have a long tradition of “ratfucking” one another when their personal lust for power is not accorded due deference. Beyond that, the House delegation appears to be dividing into two wings: the Anti-Enlightenment-ists (the routine ultra-right-wingers, commonly mislabeled as moderates), and the Anti-Reality-ists (those to the Anti-Enlightenment-ists’ right). Not surprisingly, the tribal chief of the Anti-Reality-ists, Donald Trump, has furiously tweeted (X-ed?) against Emmer this afternoon for merely being Anti-Enlightenment, and hence, a “RINO.”

What I want to know is, why are these clowns still being paid from the public till, inasmuch as they clearly refuse to perform the basic duties of their offices? Article I, Section 2, Paragraph 5 of the Constitution reads: “The House of Representatives shall choose their speaker and other officers …” This precedes the powers that the House is accorded, which are enumerated in Section 8 of the article. But the wording of that section, which says that the members of Congress “have the power to,” followed by a number of paragraphs saying what those powers are, basically says these are the powers that the Congress can exercise if it chooses to. I’m no constitutional scholar, but I don’t think the founders meant that choosing the House Speaker was something that the House might decide to do. I think they meant that the House needed to and had to do it.

Whether there’s any merit to that argument, there’s a more immediate one that makes the ongoing payment of House Republicans even more outrageous. Some of those Republicans are certainly going to oppose any continuing resolution that will fund the government, which, should they prevail, will shut it down. But a closure isn’t contingent on their prevailing. There’s another more likely way they can bring government to a halt. Should they fail to elect a Speaker by November 17, when the current funding runs out, the government will shut down due to the Speaker-less House’s inability to convene.

And once the government shuts down, no federal employee will be paid, and that includes those compelled to keep working due to the essential nature of their work. But for the last three weeks, and who knows how much longer, the House has been shut down and yet those who’ve shut it continue to be paid.

Which is to say, and not for the first time, the Republicans are giving the double standard a bad name.