Is Boehner a failure?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date

Is Boehner a failure?

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 85.7%

  • No

    Votes: 1 14.3%
  • Total voters
    7
G

Guns Guns Guns

Guest
The writer John Farrell says, "False starts and failures characterize John Boehner's nearly two-year record as speaker. As Leader of the House G.O.P. has faced two crises of this scale and come up short on each occasion. No one has ever doubted his sincerity, his conviction, or his patriotism. What they look for is his leadership."



5883486_f496.jpg






​
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week...use-democratic/story?id=16386728#.T7jzn1JKWSo
 
He sold his soul to the teabag devil. Now, it's proven to be hell. He has no control over his own party.
 
Althea said:
He sold his soul to the teabag devil. Now, it's proven to be hell. He has no control over his own party.
Click to expand...

I agree, I thought he would be bad, but not this bad. He will review the scene of the bigger gavel and regret that moment.
 
By 'frogs', did he mean morons?

Meanwhile, even though he complains about the newbies, he's cautiously weighing the chances that they are helping him achieve his number one goal....removing Obama.

They aid in the obstructionist agenda, but his problem is that there are certain issues that shouldn't be obstructed. They're a cancer, and he can't pick and choose which issues they'll actually be helpful with.

This will ultimately be very good, or very bad for the future of his party. Given the track record of delivering on their guarantee of higher unemployment via 'killing the govt.', it will be interesting to see which side turns out in larger numbers in November.

Those who like the status quo, or those who wish to excise the tumor.
 
Althea said:
By 'frogs', did he mean morons? Meanwhile, even though he complains about the newbies, he's cautiously weighing the chances that they are helping him achieve his number one goal....removing Obama. They aid in the obstructionist agenda, but his problem is that there are certain issues that shouldn't be obstructed. They're a cancer, and he can't pick and choose which issues they'll actually be helpful with.This will ultimately be very good, or very bad for the future of his party. Given the track record of delivering on their guarantee of higher unemployment via 'killing the govt.', it will be interesting to see which side turns out in larger numbers in November. Those who like the status quo, or those who wish to excise the tumor.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that cutting taxes and slashing non-defense spending isn't the path to prosperity?
 
\\()// said:
Are you saying that cutting taxes and slashing non-defense spending isn't the path to prosperity?
Click to expand...
Slashing defense spending is a necessity. Are there other areas that should be trimmed? Of course. Should austerity be the direction we take right now? History, as well as the current situation in Europe, proves otherwise.

Praytell, why the refusal to cut military spending? Why does Boehner insist on forcing the military to take obsolete aircraft/engines that are produced by his constituents, while simultaneously calling for spending cuts?
Cutting taxes has proved to be a losing venture, especially while there are two unfunded wars raging.

Likewise, the staunch refusal to compromise on the debt ceiling caused our credit rating to be lowered. I find it questionable that we never once heard a peep from conservatives when the debt ceiling issue was voted on in the past.
 
Althea said:
I find it questionable that we never once heard a peep from conservatives when the debt ceiling issue was voted on in the past.
Click to expand...

There was a white man in the White House then, wasn't there?
 
Althea said:
He sold his soul to the teabag devil. Now, it's proven to be hell. He has no control over his own party.
Click to expand...

That's basically true. Boehner has the makings of a competent leader and seems naturally inclined to compromise, but he also has to suck up to the Tea Party caucus in order to remain in his position. Kind of like how Obama changed his position on gay marriage before he ran for President in order to pander to religious nuts.
 
Azathoth said:
That's basically true. Boehner has the makings of a competent leader and seems naturally inclined to compromise, but he also has to suck up to the Tea Party caucus in order to remain in his position. Kind of like how Obama changed his position on gay marriage before he ran for President in order to pander to religious nuts.
Click to expand...
Agree that Boehner is capable of compromise in the 11th hour, after all the photo ops are done. Maybe he just needs a few drinks first.

But, his 'frogs' won't allow compromise. Whereas I agree that we need to shake up the way things are done in this country, I don't believe that (literally) killing the govt. overnight is the way to go.
 
Althea said:
Agree that Boehner is capable of compromise in the 11th hour, after all the photo ops are done. Maybe he just needs a few drinks first. But, his 'frogs' won't allow compromise. Whereas I agree that we need to shake up the way things are done in this country, I don't believe that (literally) killing the govt. overnight is the way to go.
Click to expand...

Do you think Eric Cantor knows the meaning of "compromise"?

Eric+Cantor+John+Boehner+Holds+First+Press+AXFES-RD09rl.jpg
 
Althea said:
Slashing defense spending is a necessity. Are there other areas that should be trimmed? Of course. Should austerity be the direction we take right now? History, as well as the current situation in Europe, proves otherwise.
Click to expand...

How? They are collapsing under the weight of debt. Their circumstances show we should not follow the debt path into obscurity, not that we should spend like there is no tomorrow.

Praytell, why the refusal to cut military spending? Why does Boehner insist on forcing the military to take obsolete aircraft/engines that are produced by his constituents, while simultaneously calling for spending cuts?
Cutting taxes has proved to be a losing venture, especially while there are two unfunded wars raging.
Click to expand...
He shouldn't. We need to cut spending, and useless equipment is one of the areas we can do that in easily without deteriorating the military.

Likewise, the staunch refusal to compromise on the debt ceiling caused our credit rating to be lowered. I find it questionable that we never once heard a peep from conservatives when the debt ceiling issue was voted on in the past.
Click to expand...
When "compromise" solely means capitulate it isn't the right that is failing to compromise. Basically stating that the debt path is proving a failure everywhere and that if we raise the limit we need cuts at the same time so that we can begin to corral the debt beast is simply asking for compromise.
 
Damocles said:
Yup. Dangit. I mean affect. (verb = affect, noun = effect... remember, Damo...)
Click to expand...

Then the facts contained in the link I provided (I hope it's OK I did that, BTW) don't affect what you think should be done?
 
Damocles said:
How? They are collapsing under the weight of debt. Their circumstances show we should not follow the debt path into obscurity, not that we should spend like there is no tomorrow.
Click to expand...
If our deficit were the only problem we're facing, then spending cuts might be the answer. But we have a serious issue with unemployment, which translates to lower demand. Creating higher unemployment via the 'kill the govt.' approach, will only compound the issue. Further, giving more tax breaks will only create jobs overseas, or increase cash on hand for companies that have already demonstrated that they have no intention of bringing jobs back.

Had the stimulus been administered with some oversight, we'd have seen better results. Unfortunately, many (red) states used the money for balancing their budgets, and created no jobs. Now they scream about deficits.

He shouldn't. We need to cut spending, and useless equipment is one of the areas we can do that in easily without deteriorating the military.
Click to expand...
Until/unless we can address the idiocy of flushing money down the military toilet, while simultaneously calling for the death of Medicare/etc, the conversation runs in circles.

When "compromise" solely means capitulate it isn't the right that is failing to compromise. Basically stating that the debt path is proving a failure everywhere and that if we raise the limit we need cuts at the same time so that we can begin to corral the debt beast is simply asking for compromise.
Click to expand...
Obama offered a 5/1 ration of spending cuts, to tax increases.

Grover Norquist won't allow it.
 
Damocles said:
How? They are collapsing under the weight of debt. Their circumstances show we should not follow the debt path into obscurity, not that we should spend like there is no tomorrow.


He shouldn't. We need to cut spending, and useless equipment is one of the areas we can do that in easily without deteriorating the military.


When "compromise" solely means capitulate it isn't the right that is failing to compromise. Basically stating that the debt path is proving a failure everywhere and that if we raise the limit we need cuts at the same time so that we can begin to corral the debt beast is simply asking for compromise.
Click to expand...

the austerity bit is not working in europe - it is leading europeans into further depression

a combination of tax increases with cuts and tax reform are needed, but defense spending is a gop sacred cow along with no tax increases and tax cuts for the wealthy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top