Author Topic: John Boehner’s Betrayal  (Read 896 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 252,306
John Boehner’s Betrayal
« on: December 20, 2013, 10:38:18 AM »
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/20/opinion/john-boehners-betrayal.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1387553531-ayODgkxLqDV1QNTvAngkMQ&_r=1&&pagewanted=print

December 19, 2013
John Boehner’s Betrayal
By JENNY BETH MARTIN

WOODSTOCK, Ga. — THERE’S a political axiom that says if nobody is upset with what you’re doing, you’re not doing your job. We’ve seen this proved time and again in the liberal attacks on conservatives like Sarah Palin and Dr. Benjamin Carson, who provide principled examples to women and minorities and are savaged by the left for doing that job so well.

But cheap-shot politics isn’t relegated to Democrats. Last week the House speaker, John A. Boehner of Ohio, attacked conservative groups who criticized the budget deal, hashed out by Representative Paul D. Ryan, Republican of Wisconsin, and Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, for failing to reduce spending and for raising taxes.

“They’re using our members and they’re using the American people for their own goals,” he said, calling the opposition “ridiculous.”

In one way, Mr. Boehner is correct. The goals of groups like ours are those that congressional Republicans once espoused: smaller government, less spending and lower taxes. Alas, those who demand such things today from their elected officials face unfounded attacks.

Make no mistake: The deal is a betrayal of the conservatives who fueled the Republicans’ 2010 midterm shellacking of Democrats.

It raises discretionary spending above $1 trillion for 2014 and 2015. It reneges on $63 billion of sequester cuts. Its $28 billion in deficit reduction over the next decade is a pittance compared with the $680 billion deficit piled up in 2013 alone. And it raises taxes, particularly on airplane passengers through new travel fees.

Perhaps most troubling is that the deal locks in spending for President Obama’s Affordable Care Act, ensuring that the worst parts of Obamacare will continue unfolding to the shock of increasing numbers of Americans.

But the budget plan is about more than taxes and spending. It was a slick means by which Senate Republicans could appear to oppose the deal while in fact allowing it to sail through the chamber.

Take Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky, the minority leader, who opposed efforts to defund Obamacare earlier this year while claiming to do everything possible to stop it.

After attacking conservative groups for their efforts to prevent the funding of Obamacare, Mr. McConnell, who is facing a primary challenge in his 2014 re-election race, is now seeking to portray himself as a conservative darling, championing fiscal austerity by voicing opposition to the budget proposal. (My organization has not endorsed a candidate in that race.) Doing so gives him some nifty talking points that align with most conservative groups, but it is little more than parliamentary sleight of hand.

Consider how he handled the vote on the bill. To defeat a filibuster, its supporters needed 60 senators to win cloture and move to a final vote. Instead of rallying his troops against the vote, Mr. McConnell allowed a handful of Republicans in battleground states — who needed to be seen as supporting the bill — to vote for cloture, while he and the rest railed against it, casting themselves in the role of budget hawks.

With cloture accomplished, a dozen Republicans were then free to vote against final passage if they need wiggle room when they’re confronted on the campaign trail next fall by voters demanding action on government spending. Mr. McConnell and many Senate Republicans used the vote to manipulate the system, allowing them to cast themselves as deal makers or principled conservatives, depending on their audience.

This is not principled policy making; what we’re seeing is simple gamesmanship that raises legitimate questions about which values Republicans truly hold and which are merely interchangeable with those of Democrats.

The job of Tea Party groups and other conservatives is pretty simple: to inform Americans about the need for restraint in spending, tax relief, pro-growth economic policies and individual liberty — and to support the men and women who pledge to promote these positions. To the extent that the speaker of the House and Senate Republicans are attacking such groups, it looks as if we’re doing our job.

But after this budget vote, our job expands to include informing Americans about who keeps their word in Congress and who does not.

When establishment Republicans call spending increases spending cuts, deny that raising taxes is a hike, and champion deficit reduction that doesn’t scratch the surface of our nation’s debt, it suggests a detachment from the facts. But when those who voted for them criticize their elected officials for not keeping their promises, and are then attacked for doing so, it suggests that Kurt Vonnegut was right in observing, “A sane person to an insane society must appear insane.”

Jenny Beth Martin is a co-founder of Tea Party Patriots.

Support the USO

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 21,374
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2013, 10:57:17 AM »
If you aren't part of the solution you are part of the problem!

Boehner is DEFINITELY part of the problem!
 

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 28,599
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #2 on: December 20, 2013, 11:21:32 AM »
There will be no more shutdowns.  Shutdowns are blamed on Republicans and a shutdown would have taken the focus off the failure of Obamacare.

Jenny Beth is an ideological purist who thinks a shutdown would somehow benefit conservatives.

She doesn't get it and likely never will.
From  "A Shining City on a Hill"

To "A global laughingstock"

Offline xfreeper

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,546
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #3 on: December 20, 2013, 11:45:48 AM »
boehner epitomizes an illegitimate government

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 28,599
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #4 on: December 20, 2013, 12:04:16 PM »
boehner epitomizes an illegitimate government

What a silly statement!  "Illegitimate" government?  Makes no sense.
From  "A Shining City on a Hill"

To "A global laughingstock"

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 45,534
  • #ToldYouSo
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #5 on: December 20, 2013, 02:38:31 PM »
boehner epitomizes an illegitimate government

With all due respect:  not hardly.  Unlike Obama, Boehner was elected - and re-elected - in legitimate elections not tainted by fraud.  He was legitimately elected by his constituents and, accordingly, if one doesn't like him, he stands as an example of what Churchill meant when he said that democracy was the worst form of government.  The problem with governments elected by the people is that, generally speaking, they get the government they deserve.

Offline xfreeper

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,546
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #6 on: December 20, 2013, 04:02:30 PM »
With all due respect:  not hardly.  Unlike Obama, Boehner was elected - and re-elected - in legitimate elections not tainted by fraud.  He was legitimately elected by his constituents and, accordingly, if one doesn't like him, he stands as an example of what Churchill meant when he said that democracy was the worst form of government.  The problem with governments elected by the people is that, generally speaking, they get the government they deserve.

Boehner is part of a congress that on a good day has the approval of less than 10% of the citizens. Elected in legitimate elections? I guessd it depends on your idea of legitimate. The election process is so corrupted by gerry mandering, votes bought and paid for and a ruling class that will say and do anything to insure their office. The only way to explain how cycle after cycle after cycle we end up with election winners that the people do not approve of is by questioning how legitimate the elections actually are.

Offline evadR²

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,197
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #7 on: December 20, 2013, 04:18:32 PM »
they were legitimately fraudulently elected.
"It's not who votes but who counts the votes".
November 6, 2012, a day in infamy...the death of a republic as we know it.

Offline evadR²

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,197
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #8 on: December 20, 2013, 04:19:44 PM »
Like we say in Merryland..
Whatever happened to the days when we had good crooks?
November 6, 2012, a day in infamy...the death of a republic as we know it.

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 45,534
  • #ToldYouSo
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #9 on: December 20, 2013, 06:34:20 PM »
Boehner is part of a congress that on a good day has the approval of less than 10% of the citizens. Elected in legitimate elections? I guessd it depends on your idea of legitimate. The election process is so corrupted by gerry mandering, votes bought and paid for and a ruling class that will say and do anything to insure their office. The only way to explain how cycle after cycle after cycle we end up with election winners that the people do not approve of is by questioning how legitimate the elections actually are.

Gerrymandering has such a long history in American politics that it cannot be discounted as being, by itself, a corruption of the electoral system.  The accusation of votes bought and paid for is rather serious and, considering that the known election fraud cases all involve liberals/democrats, would need strong evidence to demonstrate that Boehner was elected because of purchased votes.

The accusations of a ruling class that will say and do anything to remain in office is, simply put, one of the particular ills of democracy, including republican democracies, and is facilitated by the First Amendment, which allows anyone to say pretty much anything and leaves it up to the voters to decide who's trustworthy and who's blowing smoke.  That can result in a case of "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."  In the case of someone like Boehner, who's been re-elected several times, his constituents have no one to blame but themselves if they don't like him, and for those Americans who aren't in his constituency, they can certainly attempt to persuade his constituents to change their minds but, at the end of the day, his constituents have the final say over whether he's elected or not, and the rest of us have to deal with that decision.

There's actually a much simpler explanation for why the country, as a whole, ends up with politicians that the American people, as a whole, do not like:  everyone likes their own politician even as they dislike everyone else's politicians.  This is a very well-documented phenomenon.  It's first cousin to the problem of cutting government spending:  everyone agrees that government spending must be cut, but no one wants the spending on their own pet projects to be cut.  As a result, no government spending gets cut even though everyone is in agreement that it must be cut.

As I said before, the biggest problem with a political system where the government is popularly elected is the fact that the electorate as a whole always ends up with the government it deserves.  This can be extremely painful for those individual members of that electorate who can see more clearly than their fellow electors.

Offline xfreeper

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,546
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #10 on: December 20, 2013, 06:49:07 PM »
We can explain, rationalize, justify, etc. all the little idiosyncrasies of our electoral process all we want. Nonetheless, it has become completely corrupt and the end result is a government that is not acceptable to over 90%of the people that have elected it. Not only is it not representative of the people, it is an insular ruling class that cares about little more than amassing wealth for itself (mostly stolen from the people that supposedly 'elected' them) and retaining power and privilege. To say that we deserve the govt we elect no longer cuts it. The government we elected needs to be perp walked out of the capital because that is the only way it will ever be replaced. It is entrenched by the very corruption it has bread.

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 45,534
  • #ToldYouSo
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #11 on: December 20, 2013, 06:53:49 PM »
*  *  *

the end result is a government that is not acceptable to over 90%of the people that have elected it.

*  *  *

That is a logically impossible statement.  If the people elected it, then that necessarily means that it's acceptable to them; if it weren't, then why did they vote for it?  And if they voted for it because they believed things that weren't true, then they have to face the consequences of their own failure to do proper due diligence on the candidates - precisely the way that liberals are now having to suffer the consequences of their having voted Obama & Co. into office, thereby subjecting themselves to the tender mercies of Obamacare.

I'm not saying that we should just accept it as the way it has to be and just silently go along to get along - we should most certainly be prosletyzing for a better government, but we do have to accept that, as bad as it is, it is the government that a majority of our fellow citizens legitimately elected.

Offline happyg

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,822
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #12 on: December 20, 2013, 07:00:52 PM »
I hope someone, anyone, runs against Boehner, and at the least, republicans remove him as speaker. In 2012, he promised to get rid of Obamacare, and as soon as the election was over, he stated that, "ACA was the law of the land". That alone should retire the sob.

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 45,534
  • #ToldYouSo
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #13 on: December 20, 2013, 07:03:21 PM »
I hope someone, anyone, runs against Boehner, and at the least, republicans remove him as speaker. In 2012, he promised to get rid of Obamacare, and as soon as the election was over, he stated that, "ACA was the law of the land". That alone should retire the sob.

Who would you prefer to see as Speaker?  I'm not being snide, I'm asking an honest question.

Offline xfreeper

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,546
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #14 on: December 20, 2013, 07:30:07 PM »
it is the government that a majority of our fellow citizens legitimately elected.

Can't be legitimately elected if the system is corrupt and rigged. We have become a government with a country rather than a country with a government. Also, who elected by a majority of our fellow citizens?

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 45,534
  • #ToldYouSo
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #15 on: December 20, 2013, 07:38:00 PM »
it is the government that a majority of our fellow citizens legitimately elected.

Can't be legitimately elected if the system is corrupt and rigged. We have become a government with a country rather than a country with a government. Also, who elected by a majority of our fellow citizens?

But you haven't provided any real evidence of systemic corruption or rigging.  Until you do, the system must be treated as essentially legitimate.

Offline happyg

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 11,822
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #16 on: December 20, 2013, 07:42:39 PM »
Who would you prefer to see as Speaker?  I'm not being snide, I'm asking an honest question.

Issa comes to mind. He would push for investigations into F&F, Benghazi, and NSA. He has more guts than Boehner to do some heavy lifting.

Offline xfreeper

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,546
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #17 on: December 20, 2013, 07:54:06 PM »
But you haven't provided any real evidence of systemic corruption or rigging.  Until you do, the system must be treated as essentially legitimate.

At this point if you don't believe there is any corruption in our government I don't believe there is anything I could say or provide that would change that. That would explain a rather idealistic view of the election process though. To the other point, I suppose as long as we are willing to treat the system as essentially legitimate, we will have the government we deserve

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 45,534
  • #ToldYouSo
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #18 on: December 20, 2013, 08:07:49 PM »
At this point if you don't believe there is any corruption in our government I don't believe there is anything I could say or provide that would change that. That would explain a rather idealistic view of the election process though. To the other point, I suppose as long as we are willing to treat the system as essentially legitimate, we will have the government we deserve

That's just silly.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof and if you cannot muster any evidence whatsoever for your claims, then why on Earth would I feel obliged to agree with you?  Beyond that, however, I never said the system is entirely free of corruption, all I said was that - at least with respect to the election, and re-election, of Boehner - there is no real evidence that corruption is so endemic that it is the sole determinant of the outcome of elections.  Also, one of the problems here is that we're using the term "corruption" without having unpacked it at all to make sure that we're actually talking about the same thing.

As for idealistic views of the election process: physician heal thyself.  The belief that a "legitimate" election would necessarily produce the results you prefer and, conversely, that the failure of the election process to produce the results you prefer is proof that the system is illegitimate, is the idealistic view.  My view is precisely that even legitimate elections do not produce theoretically or ideologically pure results, but a hodge-podge that is both contradictory and incoherent to one degree or another.  One easy example of this is the fact that even if a majority of the entire population believes that the current crop of politicians should be thrown out and replaced, an election may still produce little or no turnover in politicians because, while each individual voter may believe that we should "throw the bums out," they are also very likely to believe that their own politician is just fine and not one of the "bums" who need throwing out.

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #19 on: December 20, 2013, 08:16:20 PM »
Per Gallup for the first time in history 60% want a third party - the voters agree on one thing - both parties have stopped representing us.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/165392/perceived-need-third-party-reaches-new-high.aspx

In U.S., Perceived Need for Third Party Reaches New High
Twenty-six percent believe Democratic and Republican parties do adequate job
by Jeffrey M. Jones


PRINCETON, NJ -- Amid the government shutdown, 60% of Americans say the Democratic and Republicans parties do such a poor job of representing the American people that a third major party is needed. That is the highest Gallup has measured in the 10-year history of this question. A new low of 26% believe the two major parties adequately represent Americans.



Trend: Perceived Need for a Third Major U.S. Political Party


The prior highs in perceived need for a third party came in August 2010, shortly before that year's midterm elections, when Americans were dissatisfied with government and the Tea Party movement was emerging as a political force; and in 2007, when the newly elected Democratic congressional majority was clashing with then-President George W. Bush.

A majority of Americans have typically favored a third party in response to this question. Notably, support has dropped below the majority level in the last two presidential election years in which Gallup asked the question, 2012 and 2008. Support for a third party was lowest in 2003, the first year Gallup asked the question. That year, 40% thought the U.S. needed a third party, while 56% believed the Republicans and Democrats were doing an adequate job.

Republicans, Democrats Equally Likely to See Need for Third Party

Republicans (52%) and Democrats (49%) are similar in their perceptions that a third party is needed. In fact, this marks the first time that a majority of either party's supporters have said a third party is needed.

Trend: Support for a Third Major U.S. Political Party, by Political Party Affiliation

GALLUP ANALYTICS: Sign up to learn how you can access Gallup's global database >

As would be expected, a majority of independents -- those who profess no initial allegiance to either party -- have always said the U.S. needs a third party. Seventy-one percent currently hold that view, which has been exceeded twice before, in 2007 and 2010.

Implications

Given the inability of the Republican and Democratic parties to agree on the most basic of government functions -- passing an annual budget to pay for federal programs -- it is perhaps not surprising that the percentage of Americans who believe a third party is needed has never been higher.

However, the desire for a third party is not sufficient to ensure there will be one. Structural factors in the U.S. election system and the parties' own abilities to adapt to changing public preferences have helped the Republican and Democratic parties to remain the dominant parties in U.S. government for more than 150 years. Third parties that have emerged to challenge their dominance have not been able to sustain any degree of electoral success.
Survey Methods

Results for this Gallup poll are based on telephone interviews conducted Oct. 3-6, 2013, with a random sample of 1,028 adults, aged 18 and older, living in all 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia.

For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on landline telephones and cellular phones, with interviews conducted in Spanish for respondents who are primarily Spanish-speaking. Each sample of national adults includes a minimum quota of 50% cellphone respondents and 50% landline respondents, with additional minimum quotas by region. Landline and cell telephone numbers are selected using random-digit-dial methods. Landline respondents are chosen at random within each household on the basis of which member had the most recent birthday.

Samples are weighted to correct for unequal selection probability, nonresponse, and double coverage of landline and cell users in the two sampling frames. They are also weighted to match the national demographics of gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education, region, population density, and phone status (cellphone only/landline only/both, and cellphone mostly). Demographic weighting targets are based on the March 2012 Current Population Survey figures for the aged 18 and older U.S. population. Phone status targets are based on the July-December 2011 National Health Interview Survey. Population density targets are based on the 2010 census. All reported margins of sampling error include the computed design effects for weighting.

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

View methodology, full question results, and trend data.
“The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves.” G Washington July 2, 1776

Offline rustynail

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 413
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #20 on: December 20, 2013, 08:18:33 PM »
You are going to make John cry.

Offline truth_seeker

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 18,042
  • Common Sense Results Oriented Conservative Veteran
    • The place where argument addicts can go
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #21 on: December 20, 2013, 09:14:29 PM »
I hope someone, anyone, runs against Boehner, and at the least, republicans remove him as speaker. In 2012, he promised to get rid of Obamacare, and as soon as the election was over, he stated that, "ACA was the law of the land". That alone should retire the sob.
Question: Do you know how many members of the House GOP, under Boehner's leadership, voted to approve Obamacare?

When you find that answer, is that what you want the House GOP under Boehner to do, or not?

Offline Fishrrman

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,668
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #22 on: December 20, 2013, 09:16:42 PM »
[[ boehner epitomizes an illegitimate government ]]

I don't know if he does or not. But I will say this, without equivocation:

What Mr. Boehner epitomizes is "The Vichy Republican" of the twenty-first century.

And he ain't the only one in that Foggy Bottom snake pit!

Offline Fishrrman

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 10,668
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #23 on: December 20, 2013, 09:18:38 PM »
[[ Who would you prefer to see as Speaker?  I'm not being snide, I'm asking an honest question. ]]

How 'bout Trey Gowdy?

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
Re: John Boehner’s Betrayal
« Reply #24 on: December 20, 2013, 09:21:18 PM »
[[ Who would you prefer to see as Speaker?  I'm not being snide, I'm asking an honest question. ]]

How 'bout Trey Gowdy?

Trey would be great - which means the odds are slim and none.  What we need is a speaker with leadership ability instead of gonads the size of BB's.
“The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves.” G Washington July 2, 1776


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf