I'm having a hard time even laughing at it all.
Don't be fooled. Both parties are at fault here. Blame the Republican radicals, sure, but Republican leaders have been promoting this behavior since the '90s. It all starts with Newt Gingrich.
But the Democrats opted to vote for chaos over stability. Sure, it's not their job to save Kevin McCarthy, or even to save the Republicans from themselves. But they do have a responsibility to the country. If their was a strategic gain here that would help the Democrats gain control of the House, they could plausibly argue that siding with the radical Republicans was for the good of the country (because they think Dem rule of better).
Maybe if this brings about a day of Republican reckoning that somehow results in the party effectively taking steps to control and eliminate their worst members, this will work out to the good, but I don't think that's a considered strategic move for the Democrats.
If they have in fact strengthened radical conservatives, they may hope that works out to electoral benefit, but so far that hasn't been the case. The GOP only began winning House majorities when it got radicalized in the '90s, and so far further radicalization hasn't prevented them from winning the House.
So, I think there's no strategy on the part of Democrats except short-term embarrassment of their opponents. And that comes at the cost of possibly strengthening the radical right, and certainly of maximizing the chaos and disfunction of the government.
The Democrats could have voted in favor of American political stability, but they voted to support increasing instability.
Some of my Democratic friends are feeling smug about the superiority of their party today. They don't see that their party is garbage, too, and is blithely working hand in hand with the Republicans toward a great systemic collapse.