Can Boehner lead the House?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by joepistole, Jul 23, 2011.

  1. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    I have always had doubts about Boehner's ability to lead. And now it would appear those doubts have been well founded. If Boehner had been leading, he would have been educating and persuading his caucus. But it appears that a substantial number of his caucus (Republican) are still as ignorant and just as intransient as they were the day they took office. House Republicans seem to be locked into a mode of thinking and immune to rational thought - only following the daily nonsense fed to them by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and company. It is time for Boehner to muster what leadership skills he may have, dust off his genetalia, and take a stand for the nation and actually lead Republicans in the House. For too long he has been complaining, the votes are not there. Well get them. That is why you get the big office and the title "leader".

    A good number of Republicans still believe that failing to pass an increase in the debt ceiling will not cause the nation, for the first time in our history, to default on our public debt/obligations. We still have the likes of Bachmann telling the devoted koolaid drinkers that the nation can still pay its bills without raising the debt limit. Perhaps she is a follower of the "Austrian new math". Unfortunately that kind of math only exists in right wing ideology and in the minds of those who follow Fox News and the likes of limbaugh, beck, and levin.

    At this point, I think Obama should just say he is fine with either the Gang of Six bipartisan solution or the McConnell Plan B proposal and leave it in Boehner's lap. It is time to tell Boehner and his merry band of Republicans that it's their responsiblity to pass the increase in the debt ceiling and it is their job to pass a budget bill. Perhaps Obama needs to tell the House Republicans to pull out that pocket Constitution and read it.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Where does it say the POTUS is responsible for passing legislation in the House? Oh that is right, it doesn't.

    If the nation defaults, it is Boehner and his Republican/Tea Party compadres who took us there. Not only are Republicans responsible for creating this debt and this spending, if they take us into default, they would be responsibe for the greatest of fiscal irresponsibilty, not paying the nation's bills. When granny doesn't get her Social Security check on the 3rd, let's see what Mr. Boehner and his merry band of Republicans/Tea Partiers have to say then. No doubt they will try to blame as much of it on Obama as possible and that will play well with the koolaid drinkers. But I don't think that will play quite as well with the independents. So to Obama and the Democrats, I say you guys have done your job, it's time to walk away. You guys tried to help him out and do the right thing for the nation. Put the monkey back in Boehner's lap.

    If Boehner and his merry band of Republicans take us into default by failing to raise the debt ceiling, so be it. They have a lot of good tape with Republicans telling people that not paying the nation's bills is no big deal and is a "scare tactic". Unfortunately, a lot of good people will get hurt in a default. But as the consequences of default start rolling in, let's see how well Boehner and his merry band of Republicans can take the heat.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2011
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    That isn't really a matter of education/ignorance - it's a matter of ideology.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Is not ideology that runs counter to fact and reason not ignorance? Is religion that runs counter to fact and reason not ignorance? Is unrestrained ideology and/or religion not insanity?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    I wouldn't say so, no. It may well foster ignorance. But it doesn't follow that adherents to the ideology are necessarily ignorant - people are perfectly capable of double-think, or of prioritizing their narrow interests over larger ones, or of plain old wishful thinking.

    Bottom line is that I don't see any reason to believe that the issues with House Republicans are driven by them not understanding the stakes. On the one hand they're clearly playing at brinksmanship, and on the other certain of them appear to welcome the prospect of nasty fallout. This ideology is what got them elected, after all.

    That, or stupidity. But neither of those things are "ignorance."
     
  8. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    I have to agree. I think the Republicans have backed themselves into a nasty little corner. Their strategy worked well for them when they were the minority in both houses. But now that they are called upon to govern that baseless wreckless demagoguery that served them well in the last election cycle, has created a very unpleasant little trap for both them and the nation. Obama and the Dems have tried working with the Republican leadership to find some face saving solutions. But it appears Republicans have gone too far. They are no longer able to control their membership. They have been done in by their lies and wreckless demagoguery.

    Republicans in the Senate seem to understand the stakes. However the same can not be said of Republicans in the House. I think Boehner understands the stakes, but he seems impotent to do anything about it. He is an old hand in the House. But he, in my view, is a very inadequate leader. Based on his performance to date, I just don't think he has the ability to lead his caucus. It would appear we are headed for a brickwall next week unless Republicans in the Senate can persuade their colleagues in the House to act rationally. But I don't think rational is word in the lexicon of the Republican/Tea Party House.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2011
  9. keith1 Guest

    If this is all about the fall of the U.S.,
    Then will it's states be sold off to the highest bidder?
    What would be your guess of the opening bid for Florida?
    And how much for the little girls?
     
  10. chimpkin C'mon, get happy! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,416
    So, would you say he's pulling a Boehner?

    I hope the electorate sees how stupid and reckless this is...but we still manufacture dumb here.
     
  11. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Well it is interesting that the first states to suffer a credit downgrade will be for the most part, Red states (Republican States) as they are the states most dependent on federal money.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Moodys-eyes-debt-downgrade-apf-3269364794.html?x=0&.v=3

    The Republican governor of Virginia has reversed his position on default. Before becoming governor and learning his states credit rating would suffer in the event of a federal default he was all for defaulting the federal government. After moody's announcement he did a little flip flop.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2011
  12. keith1 Guest

    Yes.
    Raising taxes on the highest U.S. incomes, to avoid a Chinese, Saudi, Other wealth source buy-up of U.S. states properties. Is this the option before us?
    And how long will this option avoid a return to this same situation down the road? (As your great Moody article suggests--a domino effect).
    Then,again, by putting a weak state or two upon the auction block, even though a temporarily embarrassing situation--would that bolster the payment of all U.S. debts, and bring the U.S. back to a strong superpower condition, worthy of the remaining states to take future lesson from?
    And could the U.S. be tolerant of a new foreign government(s) within its new map frame?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 23, 2011
  13. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
  14. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Indeed we do.
     
  15. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    In The United States foriegn governments can and do get pretty much what they want because the US is a place where money is reigns. If you have money, you can get pretty much whatever you want in the US.
     
  16. Cowboy My Aim Is True Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,707
    I'm not a huge fan of Boehner or the GOP, but I hope they don't increase the debt ceiling. Our government has a huge spending problem and you don't fix that by allowing the government to spend even more.

    The GOP finally has a chance to do something right and meaningful. How long before they cave?
     
  17. madanthonywayne Morning in America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    So, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia might lose their Aaa credit rating; meanwhile Democratic strongholds such as California and Illinois lost them already and have the worst credit ratings in the nation.

    Furthermore, 9 of the 15 states that currently have a AAA credit rating are red states. The rest already have lower credit ratings.
     
  18. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    Well, from the information I found, the Message from Standard and Poor, and Moody, is directed clearly at the Obama and the Democrats.

    The line in the sand is a $4,000,000,000,000 dollar cut in spending now, not in the out years, before any tax, or debt ceiling increase.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corne...-trillion-deal-or-downgrade-veronique-de-rugy

    We expect the debt trajectory to continue increasing in the medium term if a medium-term fiscal consolidation plan of $4 trillion is not agreed upon. If Congress and the Administration reach an agreement of about $4 trillion, and if we [were] to conclude that such an agreement would be enacted and maintained throughout the decade, we could, other things unchanged, affirm the ‘AAA’ long-term rating and A-1+ short-term ratings on the U.S.

    It is Obama and the Democrats who are the one's insisting on a Tax Increase and Debt Ceiling increase now, with budget cuts in the out years, and is has been clearly stated by the rating houses, that is exactly back wards to what needs to happen to avoid a downgrade in Bond Ratings.

     
  19. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,784
    Right and Meaningful?

    Peter Gorenstein of Yahooo Finance explains:

    ... David Walker -- the former Comptroller General of the United States and head of the Government Accountability Office -- says it's imperative both sides of the aisle find a compromise that also sets conditions to lower our long-term debt and get us back on track. If they don't, the rest of us will pay.

    Here's what he says will happen if the federal government can't reach a deal:

    1. $4 billion-plus a day will come out of the economy.
    2. Government and civilian military workers will be laid off temporarily. That will result in penalties for late payment, to be paid by taxpayers.
    3. Social security payments will be delayed.
    4. No one knows how bad the reaction will be, but Walker is confident it will be negative for the stock and bond markets and the economy.
    5. Interest rates will rise. For every 1% rise in interest rates, taxpayers will be on the hook for an additional $150 billion in debt payments.​

    Right and meaningful. Your words, not mine.
    ____________________

    Notes:

    Gorenstein, Peter. "5 Consequences If America Doesn’t Raise the Debt Ceiling". The Daily Ticker. July 22, 2011. Finance.Yahoo.com. July 24, 2011. http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...ica-doesn-t-raise-debt-ceiling-161501130.html
     
  20. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    You think that CA doesn't have plenty of Republicans in the State Assembly, and governor's office? I seem to recall a certain famous Republican being governor for quite a few years, recently. And the structure of state financial policymaking is such that it is held hostage to a group of Republicans.

    If "9 out of 15" sounds to you like a definitively significant difference, then I'd suggest you need to work harder on understanding statistics.
     
  21. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    You do when the failure to do so will tank the country's credit rating, and so drive up borrowing costs dramatically. If that happens, then the extra costs on interest we'll end up paying, will more than cancel out the most severe spending cuts being countenanced.

    A country with a deficit problem (not a "spending problem") is preferable to one with a Great Depression problem.
     
  22. Cowboy My Aim Is True Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,707
    The deficit problem is a result of the spending problem. There'd be no deficit or national debt if the government wasn't spending money it didn't have.

    And I'd still rather not raise the debt ceiling. Let our credit tank, make people feel the pain. That seems to be the only way to get Joe Sixpack to realize that uncontrolled spending is a bad idea.
     
  23. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    What we need in Washington is not just cutting spending, what we need is responsible fiscal management.
     

Share This Page