Boehner to GOP: 'Get Your Ass In Line'

[BostonPirate]

“Get your ass in line,” Boehner demanded at a closed-door meeting of the entire House Republican conference this morning. “I can’t do this job unless you are behind me.”

According to Republicans at the meeting, Boehner made an impassioned plea for his debt ceiling plan is the very best that Republicans could hope to achieve even as he acknowledged that it falls short of spending cuts that most of them want.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/07/john-boehner-to-house-gop-get-your-ass-in-line.html

It looks like Boehner is finally beginning to undestand how people view his incompetency, and the inability of the GOP to produce legislation that becomes law. Its no accident that this happened, in the midst of a barrage of phone calls from angry voters sick of the deadlock.

He has lost control of his party and his caucus.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/07/27/schumer-debt-crisis-threatens-nyers-benefits/

Schumer says Boehner’s plan is on life support and it’s time to pull the plug.

“Instead of leading the House, Speaker Boehner is being led by a fringe in his caucus that think default is okay,” said Schumer. “Well Speaker Boehner should not and we cannot let a small block of House Republicans lead the whole nation off a cliff.”

can he get control of his caucus to write a bill that the senate will consider and the president will sign?

 

[T-Rexx]

I don't think Boehner ever had control of his party.

Many Republicans took the Grover Norquist pledge never to raise taxes. Many of these people value their loyalty to this ideal over the prosperity of the nation.

Democracy is the art of compromise. The current crop of Republicans refuses to compromise. That means they refuse to participate in our democracy.

You cannot conduct a democracy with people who will not participate in the democratic process.

That is why, for the moment, American democracy is broken.

 

[mapiyu]

I don't think Boehner ever had control of his party.

Many Republicans took the Grover Norquist pledge never to raise taxes. Many of these people value their loyalty to this ideal over the prosperity of the nation.

Democracy is the art of compromise. The current crop of Republicans refuses to compromise. That means they refuse to participate in our democracy.

You cannot conduct a democracy with people who will not participate in the democratic process.

That is why, for the moment, American democracy is broken.

I agree, but I think the reason runs even deeper. It's not merely the lack of compromise, it's what they won't compromise on.

Can you imagine how things would be different if we had politicians who would refuse to compromise on economic justice? Civil rights? Human rights?

Instead we have politicians who refuse to compromise on cutting tax breaks and loopholes on corporations. At a time when we really, desperately need to raise revenue. At a time when we really can't afford to cut spending and potentially worsen the "recession."

And we have politicians who also refuse to compromise on raising the debt ceiling (i.e. PAYING OUR FREAKING DEBTS).

 

[BostonPirate]

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid predicted Wednesday that the GOP's current plan to raise the federal debt ceiling will receive no Democratic support if it manages to pass the House -- raising new questions about the ability of two parties to avoid an unprecedented national default.
"Every Democratic senator will vote against it," said Reid,, D-Nevada. It's "a flawed piece of legislation" and "a big wet kiss to the right wing."

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/07/27/debt.talks/index.html?hpt=po_t2

Broadcast news on all but fox are sounding pretty blunt. This is the rise and fall of Boehner's speakership.

There is no way he can win, but in order to save his speakership, he MUST win. ANd just to head off all the accusations of glee, I would only say that his replacement, Eric Canter will be an even BIGGER nightmare than Boehner was.

Getting a yes out of a group that you have trained to say only NO to, is the speaker's undoing,IMO

 

[mbamike]

Boehner should have told the House Republicans to "Get your head out of your ass!" TEA is only good for drinking, not running a country. If we default, we can thank the Republicans for it. Just like we can thank the Republicans for squandering away our budget surplus that President Clinton handed them.

 

[rareboy]

As I noted in my thread about Boomer backlash, Boner may be about to run into some really rough waters if the run on the stock markets continues.

By the way though, the people who are running up the price of gold are probably loving this.

 

[BostonPirate]

As I noted in my thread about Boomer backlash, Boner may be about to run into some really rough waters if the run on the stock markets continues.

By the way though, the people who are running up the price of gold are probably loving this.

I bought gold a week ago. I will sell it on august first.

And you are correct, this is not going to end well for the GOP. They depend on the senior vote to win any election. This is one of the reasons, IMO, no GOP candidate has won since the Ryan plan was announced.

 

[bike10]

Did he mean to say kiss my ass?

 

[maxpowr9]

I don't think Boehner ever had control of his party.

Many Republicans took the Grover Norquist pledge never to raise taxes. Many of these people value their loyalty to this ideal over the prosperity of the nation.

Democracy is the art of compromise. The current crop of Republicans refuses to compromise. That means they refuse to participate in our democracy.

You cannot conduct a democracy with people who will not participate in the democratic process.

That is why, for the moment, American democracy is broken.

I don't think I could have worded it more eloquently. Abe Lincoln said "a house divided against itself cannot stand". If you can't compromise, you might as well throw out the lot and start anew. A shame that Americans have ADD and will vote many of the obstructionist congresspeople back in next year.

 

[chuck10x]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/07/27/debt.talks/index.html?hpt=po_t2

Broadcast news on all but fox are sounding pretty blunt. This is the rise and fall of Boehner's speakership.

There is no way he can win, but in order to save his speakership, he MUST win. ANd just to head off all the accusations of glee, I would only say that his replacement, Eric Canter will be an even BIGGER nightmare than Boehner was.

Getting a yes out of a group that you have trained to say only NO to, is the speaker's undoing,IMO

While flipping between MSNBC and FOX during lunch today to see who is saying what, Fox was also pretty blunt.
Mentioned was talk of Boner being replaced and how much his cuts really are, Don't know if it's true but the cuts they mentioned are supposed to equal about 5 1/2 hours of spending.
They did mention Obama might use the 14th amendment to raise the debt ceiling.
Not all Republicans are in agreement with Boner, But the distinction of too little or too much was not made. 5 will not vote for his plan.

Also played was McCain's "Hobbits return to Middle Earth "speech.

 

[Kyanimal]

This will likely get me into trouble ...

I sincerely believe, that for the sake of our Nation, The Tea Party should be locked back in their trailers, with most of their Republican't buddies, butt without any beer or cigarettes, until they pay for them! And, it would be even better if they had to beg their uber-rich Masters to relax their death grip on some of their filthy money!

Keep smilin'!!
Chaz

 

[Kyanimal]

It's a selfishness that borders on treason.

In light of the 14th Amendment to The Constitution, and given the Oath of Office that ALL Congresscritters swore to, I would not hesitate to charge ALL of those, REFUSING to raise the debt limit, with Treason, if there is indeed a default, and follow through with the prosecution, to the full extent of The Law!

Keep smilin'!!
Chaz

 

[CoolBlue71]

Should be interesting if Eric Cantor were to replace John Boehner. Pretty damn interesting.

 

[JayHawk]

I agree, but I think the reason runs even deeper. It's not merely the lack of compromise, it's what they won't compromise on.

Can you imagine how things would be different if we had politicians who would refuse to compromise on economic justice? Civil rights? Human rights?

First... I agree compromise is essential and that the republican party is refusing to try and meet in the middle.

HOWEVER... consider one thing::::

The Democratic leadership and Humphrey could not control the southern wing of the party. Many of Russell's forces feared their southern constituents would vote them out of office if, as senators, they voted for equal rights for blacks. Election imperatives trumped loyalty to their party's majority. The "southern bloc" held out hope that presidential candidate George Wallace, a segregationist from Alabama, would do well in the early presidential primaries. If Wallace seemed popular, Russell would argue that the nation as a whole did not support federal civil rights legislation and that the Senate should not pass an unwanted bill. Southern senators could not compromise. Only by forcing cloture could they demonstrate to their constituents that they had fought to the end even against hopeless odds. Russell also believed there was a growing backlash against the increasingly radical tactics of civil rights protestors. A filibuster that would postpone legislation as long as possible would give the backlash time to reach a critical mass.
The Republican Party was not so badly split as the Democrats by the civil rights issue. As it turned out, only one Republican senator would participate in the filibuster against the bill. In fact, since 1933, Republicans had a more positive record on civil rights in Congress than the Democrats. In the twenty-six major civil rights votes since 1933, a majority of Democrats opposed civil rights legislation in over 80 percent of the votes. By contrast, the Republican majority favored civil rights in over 96 percent of the votes.
Yet Republicans were split on the wisdom of invoking cloture. By the advance hard counts, not more than sixteen Republicans senators were likely to support such a move. Opponents were primarily small-state senators who jealously guarded the procedure as a way to protect themselves from being steamrolled by the majority.

That snippet is a damn good demonstration that not only are things more the same than they are different; the manipulation of the electorate is not a new thing as is espoused around here constantly.

No the make up of our parties are different. Who fights for what is different. SO the lines have changed but the basic premise has not. On the debt and spending issue there are plenty of Republicans that would compromise. Eventually I believe that is what you will see.

However compromise was not the rule of the day. Getting elected and constituent approval has always and will always be the goals of a the American Politician.

 

[BostonPirate]

compromise is the very nature of democracy, champ

Jayhawk, I usually like what you have to say, but you are off the trail this time, IMO.