Boner Republicans

She Said,He Said

SHE SAID -- Conservatives Keep Losing to Leadership. Can They Change the Game? [...] The problem for members of the tea party is that the game is rigged against them, as they are repeatedly outmaneuvered and outsmarted procedurally. What they've found—and what Sen. Tom Cotton's controversial letter to Iran this week has proven—is that they're much better off taking the fight away from the House and Senate floors. The vast majority of conservative firebrands have only been in Congress for a few years; House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have been here for decades. Every rule, every parliamentary trick that conservatives could use to stick it to their leadership, Boehner and McConnell have already thought of it and found another legislative tool to stop them. [...]Sarah Mimms continued HE SAID Mimms is right that leadership is getting the better of these fights. But it isn’t just that leadership has a better command of the rules. It’s not really as though if conservatives had more procedural tricks up their sleeve they could have changed the outcome of any of the recent fights. Leadership didn’t have a better knowledge of the rules, they were the only people who were in position to pull the trigger on the rules. The reality is this: conservatives lost every meaningful fight for the next two years when they failed to oust Rep. John Boehner and Sen. Mitch McConnell. In other words, it isn’t that conservatives pulled the wrong plays. It’s that the wrong people were in the wrong positions. No amount of “experience” in the chamber is going to change the fact that as long as Boehner and McConnell are pulling the levers, we are going to continue to lose important fights. It’s nice to have a plan to get out in front of fights from a PR perspective, as Cotton has done with the Iran issue, but ultimately the corporate crony lapdogs are going to win all the important fights until they are no longer in the position to win them. [...] Leon H. Wolf continued Before anyone pleads party unity, rebut this first:  Dems vow to protect Boehner from conservative coup

GIMME a BONER! GIMME a HILL'RY! WHATTA YOU GOT?

Fundamental Problems I find myself consistently in tune with  Red State's Erick Erickson's pronouncements.  Here are two from yesterday that are, IMO, especially worth reading.  The Fundamental Problem with a Jeb Bush Presidency (and a Hillary Clinton one) I want you to do something you will not want to naturally do. You too Laura Ingraham. I want you all to do this because I consider it very important. I want you to presume you agree with Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton (your choice) on everything. I want you to presume that Jeb or Hillary is the ideal candidate in your mind. I know it is hard, but just do it. Presume that they are perfect. Separate from the White House, John Roberts now leads a Supreme Court that very clearly can be persuaded by PR campaigns and is now constantly targeted to do what is right in terms of public relations and not necessarily the law or constitution. Notwithstanding that, I think the nation would make a mistake handing the Presidency to either. The reason for that mistake has nothing to do with their positions on any issue. I would gladly support Jeb Bush were he the nominee of the Republican Party. I do not have the hostility toward him some of my friends have.  [Continued] John Boehner Uses an Outside Group to Attack Conservatives The American Action Network claims to be a “conservative” group. It was started by prominent Republican, Fred Malek, who maintains close ties to the Establishment and was Finance Co-Chairman of Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) Presidential campaign. It is run by Mike Shields, formerly of the National Republican Congressional Committee. Prior to Shields, Brian Walsh of the NRCC ran it. It was founded by former Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA)4 and previously run by Rob Collins of Cantor’s office. Collins is now at the NRSC. Former Republican Senator Norm Coleman is Chairman of the Board. The group operates as an outside entity for Rep. John Boehner (R-OH). On the same day even the establishment oriented Wall Street Journal editorial page is suggesting Boehner go, Fred Malek’s group has begun attacking conservative congressmen. Malek and the American Action Network want conservative congressmen to cave and fund Barack Obama’s executive amnesty plan. In Georgia, they have already begun running ads against Congressmen Barry Loudermilk and Jody Hice. Loudermilk and Hice, who voted for Boehner as Speaker, are now being attacked by Speaker Boehner’s outside interests. Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-KS) of Kansas is in the same boat along with Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-OK) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH). [Continued]

Obama's Pooch

Boehner’s Obamacare-related investments trace back to 2009, when the Obama administration was pushing the Affordable Health Care Act through Congress. Hey There!

Speaker PELBONER?

Voting Present is a Vote for Pelosi Some new members of the House of Representatives have pledged not to vote for Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)N/A. Instead of casting their vote for someone, they claim they will vote “present.” They need to understand that doing so is a vote for Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)11%. Under House rules, a Speaker is elected based on an absolute majority of votes cast for a person. There can be no plurality. The person elected Speaker must be elected based on an absolute majority of the votes cast. But here is the catch. Which set me to think, "What would happen if Pelosi was elected Speaker?"  What's the difference between Pelosi and Boner?  What would change?  How would Dems campaign against congress in 2016?

FOR THE RECORD

Republicans squander mandate won in November elections “Think of how stupid the average person is — and realize half of them are stupider than that.” — George Carlin Congress has gone full stupid. Late Tuesday night, lawmakers released a 1,603-page bill that would dole out more than $1 trillion in taxpayer money (the federal government, by the way, has collected a record amount in taxes this year, but still can’t stop overspending). Then, Mr. Obama came out to support — Mr. Boehner’s bill. Yes, the president loved the massive spending for Obamacare and his amnesty program. Then, just before the crucial vote, Republicans caved on just about everything. When House Speaker John Boehner campaigned for the leadership job years ago, he vowed to give members at least 72 hours to read any bill before a vote. Back in 2010, the speaker said he didn’t think “having 2,000-page bills on the House floor serves anyone’s best interest — not the House, not for the members and certainly not for the American people.” But that was before Mr. Boehner decided the highly flawed CRomnibus — with full funding for the budget-breaking Obamacare; for President Obama’s new amnesty program for more than 4 million illegal aliens; even for Michelle Obama’s disastrous school lunch program — simply had to pass. Republicans, who just five weeks ago crushed Democrats in the midterm elections — with Americans finally declaring “enough is enough” — were humiliated before, during and after the vote. First, the speaker couldn’t harness his troops to support the bill he was pushing. Both sides went behind closed doors as defections in the GOP mounted. Then, Mr. Obama came out to support — Mr. Boehner’s bill. Yes, the president loved the massive spending for Obamacare and his amnesty program. Then, just before the crucial vote, Republicans caved on just about everything. Right before the final vote, Rep. Jim Moran said Democrats got “virtually everything” they wanted in the CRomnibus package. “In 20 years of being on the appropriations [committee], I haven’t seen a better compromise in terms of Democratic priorities,” he said with a smile. Story Continues → Two weeks ago I compared Boner to an enemy infiltrator in The GOP’s War On Obama’s Executive Action Lasted About 5 Minutes.  In his comment, Robert Mitchell Jr. importuned:  Do not do the Democrat's work for them, don't attack Republicans, fight, fight for TWO-THIRDS! That's what we need, then the great purging can begin..... Nevertheless, stories of Boner Republicans perfidies continued to dominate the Drudge Free Press, leading to this plan of action. "It only takes 29 Republicans to deny Boehner a majority. It’s time to have that fight.  Let me be perfectly clear, as Dick Nixon was wont to say; Robert Mitchell Jr's  comments have been a great addition to this blog, offering as they do a reasoned defense of the GOP wing of the Democrat Party, and vital discussion.  But this—)! There was a reason why "Tokyo Rose" was tried for Treason. It is easy to lose the "will to fight", with all the current "Tokyo Rose"s, and their endless lies. We are winning, Life is getting so much better, and the Press is going down in flames. Keep the Faith ... we are winning, and Merry Christmas! # posted by  Robert Mitchell Jr. : 12/13/14, 3:13 PM Aye Carumba!  I would have used Vidkun Quisling—Norway's Benedict Arnold, or perhaps, Henri-Philippe Petain as more apt examples. And what is it we are winning?  Republicans, who just five weeks ago crushed Democrats in the midterm elections — with Americans finally declaring “enough is enough” — were humiliated before, during and after the vote. First, the speaker couldn’t harness his troops to support the bill he was pushing. Both sides went behind closed doors as defections in the GOP mounted. Then, Mr. Obama came out to support — Mr. Boehner’s bill. Yes, the president loved the massive spending for Obamacare and his amnesty program. Then, just before the crucial vote, Republicans caved on just about everything. Right before the final vote, Rep. Jim Moran said Democrats got “virtually everything” they wanted in the CRomnibus package. “In 20 years of being on the appropriations [committee], I haven’t seen a better compromise in terms of Democratic priorities,” he said with a smile. Run-up to the election promises. Boehner vows House will repeal Obamacare Boehner vows House will act to stop Obama's executive fiat;  We got Democrats got “virtually everything” they wanted in the CRomnibus package. Newly Empowered, Mitch McConnell Promises an End to ‘Gridlock’ We won Zip.  We have lost hope. Boner is a liar.  The Republican Party are waging total war against those of us teapartiers who want promises kept, and government brought under control.   Here's our operating meme, then. "The British ministry have so long hired their gazetteers to repeat and model into every form lies about our being in anarchy, that the world has at length believed them, the English nation has believed them, the ministers themselves have come to believe them, and what is more wonderful, we have believed them ourselves. Yet where does this anarchy exist? Where did it ever exist, except in the single instance of Massachusetts? And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it's motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion.[1] The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure." - Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, Paris, 13 Nov. 1787 Say Amen.

Pulled out by the roots already

TOO LATE

Boner's Vichy Soup

vichyssoishy gummint

The Founding Fathers were clear about ...

you know who you are                                                                           A Constitutional Moment

“ A Constitutional Moment Seth Lipsky  Nov. 20, 2014     The Founding Fathers were clear about who sets immigration policy The coming clash between President Obama and Congress over immigration promises to light up what I like to call a constitutional moment. This is a moment in which our politics are so divided that we have scraped away the soil of legislation and are fighting on American bedrock. Rarely has it shone more clearly than in respect of who has the power to decide who can come here and be naturalized as a citizen. Nor, the record suggests, did they want the President setting policies on immigration and naturalization. There may be talk about Obama having presidential “discretion” in enforcing immigration laws, but the record of the Constitutional Convention makes clear where the founders wanted discretion to lie. “The right of determining the rule of naturalization will then leave a discretion to the legislature,” James Madison quotes Alexander Hamilton as saying. This is one of the reasons we seceded from Great Britain. King George III had been interfering with immigration to the colonies. It was one of the complaints enumerated in the Declaration of Independence. The British tyrant, the Americans declared, had endeavored “to prevent the Population of these States.” For that purpose, they said, George III had been not only “obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners” but also “refusing” laws “to encourage their Migrations hither.” The articles of confederation that first bound the newly independent states failed to solve this problem. Each state set its own policy on naturalization, with the potential for chaos. Hence the founders, who gathered in 1787 in Philadelphia to write the Constitution, granted to Congress the power to “establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.” They could have granted this to the President or left it to the states, but they assigned it instead to Congress. So Obama, in threatening to act on his own, is playing with constitutional fire. It’s not that I object to his liberality on immigration. On the contrary, for years I was part of the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page. It reckons that it would be illogical to stand for the free movement of trade and capital absent the free movement of labor. It once called for a constitutional amendment saying “there shall be open borders.” That is based on the idea of human capital, the notion that in a system of democratic capitalism people have an incentive to produce more than they themselves consume. This system discovers that more people lead to a richer society for all. In my generation, this point animated the campaign for America to take in the boat people escaping Vietnam after the communist conquest. What a windfall they turned out to be. I have also long plumped for a merger of pro-immigration activists and pro-life conservatives. A movement that cherishes pro-life principles contradicts itself when it emerges against immigration. Better to press consistently for the idea that more people are better, particularly in a country as underpopulated as the U.S., which ranks near the bottom of the world’s nations in population density. All that, though, is trumped by the constitution. It not only seats naturalization power in Congress but also gives it almost total sway. The founders discussed adding language relating to how long someone must reside in America before becoming a citizen. In the end they required of Congress only that its rule be “uniform.” They didn’t want the states feuding over this and setting competing policies. They wanted a united front to the world. Nor, the record suggests, did they want the President setting policies on immigration and naturalization. There may be talk about Obama having presidential “discretion” in enforcing immigration laws, but the record of the Constitutional Convention makes clear where the founders wanted discretion to lie. “The right of determining the rule of naturalization will then leave a discretion to the legislature,” James Madison quotes Alexander Hamilton as saying. Madison followed by remarking that he “wished to maintain the character of liberality” that had been “professed” throughout the states. He was not for open immigration. He “wished to invite foreigners of merit and republican principles among us.” He noted that “America was indebted to emigration for her settlement and prosperity” and added, “That part of America which had encouraged them most had advanced most rapidly in population, agriculture, and the arts.” The Founding Fathers were not naive. They worried plenty about intrigue by what Madison, at one point, called “men with foreign predilections” who might “obtain appointments” or even seek public office. One can imagine that they would be horrified by the loss of control of the southern border, the lawlessness, the abuse of welfare and the scent of rebellion north of the Rio Grande. But the founders also feared a King–or a President who acted like one. They wanted the question of immigration settled by Congress and wrote an impeachment clause that glints in the fray. Lipsky is the editor of the New York Sun SOURCE: The Writings of James Madison, Volume IV That Time Magazine would print Lipsky's (editor of the New York Sun) treatise  means that at least one reliably leftist publication is impressed. ”

Boner says NO IMPEACHMENT

Caption Barry

3 primary challengers means he wins

Time to put him in the blender

We now know what John Boehner really thinks of his Republican colleagues, and those Americans who gave him a chance to be Speaker in 2010.

On the issues front, Boehner, who faces three primary opponents, revealed that out of all the problems facing the nation, the one that he is willing to go to the wall to achieve is immigration reform.   [...]
By revealing his fealty to the giant corporate and elitist interests ... Boehner made clear what most had suspected for a long while.  The man who was at best a reluctant warrior in the battle to reduce the size and scope of government is willing to risk power for his drinking buddy’s corporate interests. [Boehner's Disdain Spells Trouble]

Senator Blofeld

Blohard strikes back Tommy Lee Smith

Nancy and Boner, Sitting in a Tree ...

" Speaker John Boehner is considering letting the House take the initial vote Wednesday on a Senate-prepared bill to lift the debt ceiling and restart funding for the shuttered federal government--apparently even if House conservatives object.

If they do object, it would mean Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and her House Democrats could become critical to its passage. "Boehner will need Pelosi votes," said one senior Democratic aide, familiar with what he described as the cross-party negotiations that have been occurring Wednesday morning. "

GOP SURRENDER MONKEYS

Whoops- Just Getting Ready

More Boner Drool

—   you staggeringly stupid berk                                 Boehner to Obama: ‘This is your moment,’                                we want you to succeed’