Just how inept is Boehner?

[thereisnospoon]

BO & Reid better cave or its a DEPRESSION that happened on their watch. Inexcusable. BO had a deal and blew it with a $400b revenue demand. Bet that 1st deal w/Boehner looks good now.

What exactly is unreasonable about a 400 billion over 10 years revenue plan? Nothing, as far as I can see? So why are you all poo pooing it? Why should ONLY those on Social security and medicare have to make sacrifices when they did NOT cause this crisis or the overspending on defense or the bail outs for the bankers and the Aig's?

I truly do not understand what is wrong with making everyone share in this sacrifice? Can you or anyone explain to me what is wrong with that?

Shared sacrifice. A liberal made up term to appease the class envy crowd.

 

[thereisnospoon]

BO & Reid better cave or its a DEPRESSION that happened on their watch. Inexcusable. BO had a deal and blew it with a $400b revenue demand. Bet that 1st deal w/Boehner looks good now.

What exactly is unreasonable about a 400 billion over 10 years revenue plan? Nothing, as far as I can see? So why are you all poo pooing it? Why should ONLY those on Social security and medicare have to make sacrifices when they did NOT cause this crisis or the overspending on defense or the bail outs for the bankers and the Aig's?

I truly do not understand what is wrong with making everyone share in this sacrifice? Can you or anyone explain to me what is wrong with that?

At the end of the day, the only group not making a sacrifice is the federal government.
Put that in your hankie and blow.

 

[thereisnospoon]

At a time when real leadership is called for Boehner wastes precious time on a useless Tea Bagger bill that has no hope of passing.

How many political stunts is he going to pull? Is he that far in the Tea Party pocket? When the political solution calls for compromise, the Republicans move in the opposite direction

The balanced budget amendment is a sham. The votes are never going to be there. Two thirds majority in both houses is needed to pass BBA. It will NEVER happen. Why waste time on this silliness?

Jobs jobs jobs...

(Oh and Boner is doing something that is called appeasement.)

Government does not create jobs. Not in the private sector.
Government employment does not produce. It only consumes.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

At a time when real leadership is called for Boehner wastes precious time on a useless Tea Bagger bill that has no hope of passing.

How many political stunts is he going to pull? Is he that far in the Tea Party pocket? When the political solution calls for compromise, the Republicans move in the opposite direction

The balanced budget amendment is a sham. The votes are never going to be there. Two thirds majority in both houses is needed to pass BBA. It will NEVER happen. Why waste time on this silliness?

At a time when real leadership is called for Boehner wastes precious time on a useless Tea Bagger bill that has no hope of passing.

Last time I checked Nobama was president and after two and a half years he 14 trillion miles ahead of anyone on the road of ineptness. Nobama makes Carter look competant

 

[thereisnospoon]

is there ANY PLAN that has been offered from anyone that does not still leave trillions in deficit over the 10 year period? I thought every plan offered still leaves trillions in deficits over the 10 year period they are using?

Nope. Pathetic all of them. Now I have heard Pauls plan accomplished that, which could be the reason it wasnt considered. Lets borrow more now because the interest rate might go up. But increasing the size of debt will cause the service price to go up.

Bite the bullet now or take it to the head latter.

This post right here describes the moronity of the Tea Party in a nutshell. Let me ask something.... do you own your own home? If you do, what's the term of your mortgage? Is it 10 years? Probably not. So tell me, why does this debt HAVE to be paid in 10 years? Why can't it be 20, 30, 40, or even 50 years? Sure... the debt will outlive most of us over 40 years old... but as long as there's a plan in place, what is the ******* difference? The problem with the Tea Party is they want it all.... RIGHT NOW!!!!!, and they don't care who they have to **** over to do it.

Jesus Christ.
With your plan, we may as well say "screw the debt."
Here's the diff. Pay close attention. A mortgage or other term interest loan has a payment schedule and terminated when the loan is satisfied.
What you want is a open ended I O U. That is the status quo.
Why is it your side insists on doing the same things over and over and expect a different result?

 

[thereisnospoon]

If Harry Reid was a "real leader" he would just rubber stamp whatever the Republicans in the House sent up.

Well, since he doesn't really have a plan he's just gonna take out what he doesn't like and put in a few things and claim it's his idea. Also he's lying about how much spending cuts are in his bill. If Boehner had said 3 trillion Harry would have said his cuts 6 trillion.

This is all about raising taxes.....nothing more. Take that to the bank.

Comment was solely intended to bait the libtards in here. They've been claiming that being a servile toad is the way for Boehner to be a "real leader." I wanted to see how they would respond if the same thing was said about a Democrat.

Not entirely. The tax increase is presented as a means to solidify the President's political base. The Progressives and those at the public trough will not be pleased with Obama and democrats in Congress if the evil rich are not punished.
The tax increase is all about political cover.

 

[Steelplate]

Tell me who is discussing paying the debt? who was that again? No one in congress which proves the idiocy of borrowing more. I have not seen a single l;legitimate reason for doing so.

CAN YOU BE THE ONE?

Yeah... I can. It's really simple. Raising the debt ceiling is not "borrowing more". It's paying for things we've already spent. Debt reduction is happening as we speak... having the ability to have some breathing room while we work TOGETHER on a viable plan to reduce the debt is simply not Borrowing more. The spending has already been done. It's paying for what we spent. Screwing with that ceiling will end up causing more harm than simply raising it. The point that I was trying to make with the INTEREST RATES is that if we lose our credit rating... we're fucked. Not only will our debt payments go up, but all of our interest rates will go up... that means people like you and I will also be affected.

All because your side wants to play hardball on this shit. Both sides are actually and honestly discussing debt reduction as a priority. I am 46 years old and have never seen BOTH sides agreeing that it needs to be done like what's going on right now. So... with Debt reduction getting priority.... we certainly will not be "borrowing more".

But your side has to be reasonable(which isn't a strong suit for you). There's no reason why we can't do it over 20, 30, or even 40 years. It's not like the country is going anywhere... we know where we live. There's no reason to **** people over to do this. It can be done reasonably and humanely.

The thing is.... your side doesn't seem to want reasonable and humane. They want drastic and hurtful. Personally, I can't abide by that.

HOLY MOTHER OF GOD.

This is exactly why we must be tnakful for the Tea Party......becuase we have bozo's like this guy who think everythng is going to be fine continuing to increase the rate of spending 6% a year like its a zero sum game. Holy fcukk...........

All the bills currently in play out there are fcukking bogus and dont do shit.......and it hit me last night. These fcukkers......all of them......... KNOW we're going to get downgraded, effectively dropping the value of the dollar so we can inflate our way out of debt. This whole process has been one huge sham. They'll all keep their constituents happy and let the slow erosion of inflation fcukk over everybody and they can say, "Hey....we kept our campaign promises so WTF???!". Moody's to the rescue..........like the slow creep of socialism......inflation hits people incrementally instead of the knock out blow in one shot that would come next week. Dont worry........they'll get an agreement before Tuesday.........I'd bet my house on it.

Holy mother of god.... You're an idiot.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What exactly is unreasonable about a 400 billion over 10 years revenue plan? Nothing, as far as I can see? So why are you all poo pooing it? Why should ONLY those on Social security and medicare have to make sacrifices when they did NOT cause this crisis or the overspending on defense or the bail outs for the bankers and the Aig's?

I truly do not understand what is wrong with making everyone share in this sacrifice? Can you or anyone explain to me what is wrong with that?

It leaves trillion dollar deficits.

is there ANY PLAN that has been offered from anyone that does not still leave trillions in deficit over the 10 year period? I thought every plan offered still leaves trillions in deficits over the 10 year period they are using?

Here's a plan that will not harm thiose social programs that you on the left love so much.

shut down the following departments
Departmernt of Education
Homeland Security
IRS
All of the Carz's
Money given to the U.N.
federal reserve

Why do we need three departments for Agricultural

Agricultural Marketing Service
Agricultural Research Service
Agriculture Department (USDA)



Two departments for the same department
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau (Justice)
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (Treasury)


Why can't the ATFEB take care of Arms Control and the FBI take care of International Security

This link and what I posted was just the first page multipul departments that one could or I mean should be able to handle.

A-Z Index of U.S. Government Departments and Agencies (A): USA.gov

 

[thereisnospoon]

Clearing the decks of the debt battle to focus on jobs. Thats where they should have been; not digging in for a scenario which presents a no-win situation for the Country.

Of course that is contingent if you feel that the GOP ever wanted to get the economy moving while President Obama was in office. So now we are going to have this catastrophe so the GOP supposedly gets a political football.

They attempted repeal of obamascare.

That discredits any notion of not wanting to get jobs moving, they voted down cap and trade so now that is being implemented through regulation.

Such dishonesty oh my.

Not sure what you're talking about. Why not use data instead of anecdotes?

The Congress has been focused on this debt battle for a month. Every sane member of the body knows the debt ceiling has to be raised. The Democratic Congressmen and the President wanted to do it in a way that means we don't have to worry bout it again until 2013 (at the earliest) so the Congress and the executive can focus on job creation. The GOP is now demanding both houses pass a constitutional amendment before it gets done. It may be unprecedented in the history of the body.

Job creation, YES!!! BY getting government the hell out the way of commerce!
The only reason why Obama and the democrats want a ceiling that lasts thru 2013 is safety from political blow back.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Not sure what you're talking about. Why not use data instead of anecdotes?

The Congress has been focused on this debt battle for a month. Every sane member of the body knows the debt ceiling has to be raised. The Democratic Congressmen and the President wanted to do it in a way that means we don't have to worry bout it again until 2013 (at the earliest) so the Congress and the executive can focus on job creation. The GOP is now demanding both houses pass a constitutional amendment before it gets done. It may be unprecedented in the history of the body.

Actually the debt-ceiling doesn't need to be raised.

The President could always do his job and institute spending cuts by executive order.

I remember Reagan doing exactly that the day he walked into the Oval Office.

Politically speaking, President Reagan (see how I did that...I didn't call him RAY-GUN or try to obfuscate the name in any way) didn't do it prior to running for re-election.

Fiscally speaking, the debt ceiling was raised time and again by Presidents of both parties without the weak economy sharing the stage. Instead of focusing on creating jobs, instead of focusing on their favorite subject (tax cuts); the GOP has decided to make this the Waterloo moment.

And it looks like they will succeed in driving the country off the cliff.

Not that the economy would hinge on my inaction (believe me) but I'm not purchasing any stocks until after this is over. I imagine a lot of investors and potential investors are sitting on the sidelines as well.

Past administrations are not part of this issue. Mentioning them is no longer permitted.
You don't get to be at the helm for 60% of the cruise then blame the previous helmsman when the ship crashes.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I do follow current events, there is no legislation called "obmascare".

Cutting it is not a jobs program.

Perhaps the GOP is incapable of just making up things?

LOL so you have no idea to the reference obumblecare either AKA the healthcare bill.

Really?

Do you understand the term cap and trade? How it was voted down and is still being implemented.

Thanks....is it that hard for you to write like an adult?

Voting down the healthcare bill was a jobs program? Please explain that.


Cap and trade, I'm not for it; however the idea of Presidential subversion of Congress has been around for a number of years. Remember the Contras in Nicaragua...congress didn't want to fund them; President Reagan found a way. How many "signing orders" did the 2nd President Bush have?

Again, the Congress will do what the leaders in both houses want. The GOP could have gotten this off their desks months ago but they chose to make this the focal point of the Summer. They could be focusing on any number of things right now; they chose to focus on this.

Right now, they could approve a plan that takes this off the table until 2013 at the earliest; they have chosen not to even though the plan has MORE spending cuts than the one Speaker Boehner proposed and got passed yesterday and has no tax increases.

It's pretty obvious that the GOP (or at least parts of their congressional membership) want a default just to see what happens

Simple. Obamacare is a job killer.
The threshold for subsidy is about $60k per year. So if a married couple earns just over that it may be economically advantageous for the lower earning spouse to stop working. The couple now has ZERO insurance burden.
Next, employers will cut their insurance costs. They will send their employees to the government exchanges.
Other employers will not add employees to stay under the Obamacare limit for businesses to insure.
Other employers will simply stop expanding or will sell out and close because of the red tape Obamacare throws at them.
Obamacare is a job killing 2500 page monstrosity.

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

Inept is a pretty strong adjective to describe the Speaker of the House who must have arrived in that position with some semblance of skills, leadership, vision and commitment.

This practice of holding a sole individual accountable for the outcomes of an immensely complicated politically motivated bureaucracy is silly.

 

[Steelplate]

Actually the debt-ceiling doesn't need to be raised.

The President could always do his job and institute spending cuts by executive order.

I remember Reagan doing exactly that the day he walked into the Oval Office.

Politically speaking, President Reagan (see how I did that...I didn't call him RAY-GUN or try to obfuscate the name in any way) didn't do it prior to running for re-election.

Fiscally speaking, the debt ceiling was raised time and again by Presidents of both parties without the weak economy sharing the stage. Instead of focusing on creating jobs, instead of focusing on their favorite subject (tax cuts); the GOP has decided to make this the Waterloo moment.

And it looks like they will succeed in driving the country off the cliff.

Not that the economy would hinge on my inaction (believe me) but I'm not purchasing any stocks until after this is over. I imagine a lot of investors and potential investors are sitting on the sidelines as well.

Past administrations are not part of this issue. Mentioning them is no longer permitted.
You don't get to be at the helm for 60% of the cruise then blame the previous helmsman when the ship crashes.

Mentioning past administrations is "no longer permitted"? Who the **** do you think you are? be at the helm for 60% of the cruise? Gimme a ******* break. We've been living the "trickle down dream" for 30 years now... and look at the shape we're in. Let's see... Reagan, Bush I, Bush II... vs. Clinton(who turned Republican his last term) and 2.5 years of Obama.

Mighty convenient to not want to talk about anyone else, isn't it? I know... let's blame all 14T of debt on Obama.. because he's the president... oh wait... too late... you guys already have.

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

yeah the "no longer permitted" statement kindof represents the obstinant mentality which enfueled this congressional/senate/executive clusterfuck...good for you for perpetuating the sentiment here and now.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Inept is a pretty strong adjective to describe the Speaker of the House who must have arrived in that position with some semblance of skills, leadership, vision and commitment.

This practice of holding a sole individual accountable for the outcomes of an immensely complicated politically motivated bureaucracy is silly.

Just because someone was elected doesn't mean they're capable of doing the job. Nobama is a first class example.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Politically speaking, President Reagan (see how I did that...I didn't call him RAY-GUN or try to obfuscate the name in any way) didn't do it prior to running for re-election.

Fiscally speaking, the debt ceiling was raised time and again by Presidents of both parties without the weak economy sharing the stage. Instead of focusing on creating jobs, instead of focusing on their favorite subject (tax cuts); the GOP has decided to make this the Waterloo moment.

And it looks like they will succeed in driving the country off the cliff.

Not that the economy would hinge on my inaction (believe me) but I'm not purchasing any stocks until after this is over. I imagine a lot of investors and potential investors are sitting on the sidelines as well.

Past administrations are not part of this issue. Mentioning them is no longer permitted.
You don't get to be at the helm for 60% of the cruise then blame the previous helmsman when the ship crashes.

Mentioning past administrations is "no longer permitted"? Who the **** do you think you are? be at the helm for 60% of the cruise? Gimme a ******* break. We've been living the "trickle down dream" for 30 years now... and look at the shape we're in. Let's see... Reagan, Bush I, Bush II... vs. Clinton(who turned Republican his last term) and 2.5 years of Obama.

Mighty convenient to not want to talk about anyone else, isn't it? I know... let's blame all 14T of debt on Obama.. because he's the president... oh wait... too late... you guys already have.

Congress has been run by the democrats for 60 years since 1949. Congress controls spending and congress creats the laws an\d programs.

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

Inept is a pretty strong adjective to describe the Speaker of the House who must have arrived in that position with some semblance of skills, leadership, vision and commitment.

This practice of holding a sole individual accountable for the outcomes of an immensely complicated politically motivated bureaucracy is silly.

Just because someone was elected doesn't mean they're capable of doing the job. Nobama is a first class example.

Well, I was trying to be non partisan and simply make a statement of respect to the third highest elected position in the United States.

 

[Steelplate]

Inept is a pretty strong adjective to describe the Speaker of the House who must have arrived in that position with some semblance of skills, leadership, vision and commitment.

This practice of holding a sole individual accountable for the outcomes of an immensely complicated politically motivated bureaucracy is silly.

You're absolutely right. As I said in my original post on this thread. Boehner is in pretty much the same boat the Harry Reid was in the Senate during the health Care debate.

Reid knew he wasn't going to get any help from the GOP, and he had his own version of dissent in his own caucus with the Blue Dog Democrats(Dems that got elected in traditionally conservative areas).

But... the one thing that Boehner did do was to egg on and act like a Tea Party Representative, when in fact he knew that this unyielding demeanor was going to be an unproductive venture when it came time to actually work on governing this country... but hey... he got what he wanted... to be Speaker of the House.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Inept is a pretty strong adjective to describe the Speaker of the House who must have arrived in that position with some semblance of skills, leadership, vision and commitment.

This practice of holding a sole individual accountable for the outcomes of an immensely complicated politically motivated bureaucracy is silly.

Just because someone was elected doesn't mean they're capable of doing the job. Nobama is a first class example.

Well, I was trying to be non partisan and simply make a statement of respect to the third highest elected position in the United States.

Nobama is condenmed by his own words.
obama
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills,"

PolitiFact | Bachmann said Obama voted against the debt limit when he was a senator

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

Inept is a pretty strong adjective to describe the Speaker of the House who must have arrived in that position with some semblance of skills, leadership, vision and commitment.

This practice of holding a sole individual accountable for the outcomes of an immensely complicated politically motivated bureaucracy is silly.

You're absolutely right. As I said in my original post on this thread. Boehner is in pretty much the same boat the Harry Reid was in the Senate during the health Care debate.

Reid knew he wasn't going to get any help from the GOP, and he had his own version of dissent in his own caucus with the Blue Dog Democrats(Dems that got elected in traditionally conservative areas).

But... the one thing that Boehner did do was to egg on and act like a Tea Party Representative, when in fact he knew that this unyielding demeanor was going to be an unproductive venture when it came time to actually work on governing this country... but hey... he got what he wanted... to be Speaker of the House.

Agree. He played his hand, as they all do. They are handcuffed and quite frankly screwed by their own ambitions.

I find it curiously amusing that the business of America plays out on a public stage and we get to observe, criticize and admonish as it it were a unique game. If corporate politics were transparent I wonder if the shocked mentality would exist; or would we say "oh well, that is how businesses act."

The strategies, negotiation tactics, closed meetings, public statements and fear quelling are no different than those of a CEO/Board of any public company. Yet we do not treat the business of governement with the same indifference. One might say that government is a personal entitity, but I question that position with deep concern.