DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: sirs on September 25, 2015, 01:53:02 PM
-
Interesting. He should have stepped down LONG ago, but the timing isn't very condusive to the current political climate surrouding the GOP candidates. One wonders if he just said "enough", I'm done with this
-
glad to see that crying drunk leave!
-
He is tired of being threatened by the goofy teabaggers.
His replacement could be worse.
-
Well that's one opinion.....and given the source, unlikely the reason
-
It is what has said. He does not want to shut down the government over Planned parenthood, the the 'baggers do. They were plotting against him.
-
What who said?
News Flash, the Tea Party is not pushing for the shut down of anything. Given that the House passed legislation that FUNDS ALL THE GOVERNMENT, simply doesn't cover all aspects of 1 of a gazillion Government sponsored agencies, the only one shutting down anything would be the veto pen of President my way or the highway
-
does not want to shut down the government over Planned parenthood, the the 'baggers do.
No the Democrats want to shut down Gvt over Planned Parenthood.
Why is Planned Parenthood even needed anymore?
according to Planned Parenthood only a fraction of their business is abortion.
they supposedly provide women's healthcare
So doesn't Obamacare cover women's healthcare?
if ObamaCare does not cover women's health issues...then is ObamaCare a "war on women"?
-
(https://scontent-dfw1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/12065487_10153692301929901_748321161204404961_n.jpg?oh=41123c634d30ae6a05335831e5982629&oe=56A6236A)
Hopefully we can get some real fighters that punch back and know how to fight. Why should we lose every battle when we control the House, Senate, and Supreme Court? It's a disgrace we have allowed that to happen. We need people that know how to fight as dirty as the Taxocrats!
-
Both played the political game, far too much. Saying one thing to appease the base of the party, then doing something to simply "get along", when the Dems would throw a temper tantrum. In some perverted way, they believed they could get Democrats, the media, and even thier base to "like them", if they literally caved on issue, after issue, after issue. They never saw it as caving of course, they saw it as "compromise". However compromise to Democrats is simply doing it their way....just not as fast, but still doing it their way.
Pop Quiz.......When's the last time the Democrats ever compromised on an issue that was favorable towards a conservative cause?
That's a serious question, by the way
-
Planned Parenthood does lots of good. No, Obamacare does not provide what Planned Parenthood does.
The Teabaggers have stated they want to shut down the government again.
Boehner refused to cooperate with them. He got tired of those jackasses and so he quit.
There is no reason to cooperate with the antediluvan reactionary you call "Conservatives". They are assholes .
I think President Obama is doing a great job! He refuses to be a lame duck!
-
Planned Parenthood does lots of good.
In the same sense , the fascists did many good things.
Why do we forget all the good done by the fascist governments of the 1930s?
Probably unfair to allow a large bunch of innocent deaths to overshadow the better activity.
-
No, Obamacare does not provide what Planned Parenthood does.[/quote]
Like what?
-
LIke anything. Not everyone has Obamacare, to start with.
Planned Parenthood provides information on family planning, it does mammograms and offers free services that insurance does not.
-
Planned Parenthood does lots of good.
In the same sense , the fascists did many good things.
Why do we forget all the good done by the fascist governments of the 1930s?
Probably unfair to allow a large bunch of innocent deaths to overshadow the better activity.
BINGO.......not to mention that again, it wouldn't be the Tea Party shutting down anything, since the whole of Government is funded. Merely 1, and ONLY 1 of a bazillion organizations is not being fully funded, and Obama would shut the Government down over that 1 tiniest of a program
Notice also how no one could come up with the last time the Democrats "caved" on anything. THAT's why Boehner has been shown the door
-
Planned Parenthood..................... does mammograms.......................
Really?
I recently saw a report that they did not.
I will look.
Women can’t walk into a Planned Parenthood clinic and get a mammogram on the spot. The clinics don’t have mammography equipment. Planned Parenthood performs gynecological exams, including breast exams, and refers women to other facilities to have mammograms performed, much like women are referred to radiological centers by their gynecologists or primary care physicians.
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/planned-parenthood-and-mammograms/
Cancer screening and prevention services — which would include breast exams — made up 14.5 percent of all medical services. Abortion made up 3 percent, with 329,445 abortion procedures in 2010.
..................
Planned Parenthood says it served about 3 million people in 2010. That would mean about 25 percent of its clients received a breast exam or breast care, or about 1 in 4. About 11 percent of clients, or 1 in 9, received abortion services. Contraception services and STD testing and treatment totaled well over 3 million for each category.
-
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid claimed in a floor speech that 30 percent of U.S. women get their health care from Planned Parenthood. That’s false. By one measure, the number is less than 3 percent.
Reid’s spokesman told the Washington Post Fact Checker that the senator misspoke and meant to say that 1 in 5 — or 20 percent — of all women have visited a Planned Parenthood at least once in their lifetime. But even that figure is questionable.
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/08/reid-wrong-on-planned-parenthood/
Huh?
So the benefits provided by Planned Parenthood, could be pretty easily replaced.
-
Pretty much......not to mention the amazing gall Obama has in shutting down the entire Government, if this 1 program isn't fully funded
-
The reason why the Right makes such a big deal of abortion is that banning abortion and exterminating all abortion clinics costs the government nothing. The rich bastards that founded the Tea Party do not actually give a shit about anything but making tons of money selling coal, oil and whatever else they can get for cheap and sell at a huge profit and paying minimal taxes.
So they have enlisted all the sorry souls whose parents at one time or another told them that they exist only because their parents lacked birth control or anyplace where they could get an abortion cheap, and they have a huge constituency at a low, low price.
"They didn't wanna have me,
But somehow I wuz had:
Goodness gracious,
That's why I'm so bad!"
Sung by a Jet in West Side Story.
Here;s the truth for the right wing: Youse been had!
-
The reason why the Right makes such a big deal of abortion is that banning abortion and exterminating all abortion clinics costs the government nothing.
and yet, given those parameters, Obama would veto a budget, and shut down the entire Government, based on a program that supposedly "costs the Government nothing"?? So he'd be shutting it down......on principal?? Fricken amazing
-
Being as none of you are women, Planned Parenthood is not anything that you are likely to be familiar with.
If Obama is forced to veto a budget because the idiot Republican'ts want to play their stupid games with it, that would be their fault, and that is the way most of the country would see it.
-
and yet, given those parameters, Obama would veto a budget, and shut down the entire Government, based on a program that supposedly "costs the Government nothing"?? So he'd be shutting it down......on principal??
-
it does mammograms
If Obamacare doesn't offer mammograms then ObamaCare is the real war on women!
Next bullshit argument please?
-
(http://www.silverdiner.com/sites/default/files/politico_logo_-large1.jpg?1347988474)
Boehner Betrayed His Party
Why the Speaker's resignation is great news for conservatives.
By MICHAEL A. NEEDHAM
September 25, 2015
"We want to give Boehner a governable majority so the crazies you hate will be irrelevant."
This is how the Washington Republican Establishment talks to its K Street allies. It's a quote from last October when a Republican campaign operative told the business community why it was important for Republicans to capture 245 House seats. The establishment isn't focused on marginalizing liberal lawmakers trying to grow the size and scope of government. They want to marginalize conservative lawmakers fighting to keep the reasonable promises they have made to their constituents.
The friction of the last several years has not been about differences in tactics. It has been about deep and irreconcilable disagreements over the goals the GOP should pursue. It has been a dispute over how much the center-right should try to disrupt the status quo. Armed with his 245-seat majority, Speaker John Boehner opted against pursuing any reform agenda. He ignored the hopes and dreams of those Republican voters who delivered the GOP control of the House in 2010 and the Senate in 2014 and instead pushed the agenda of Washington's ruling class.
The legislative history validates this thesis.
Those within Speaker Boehner's tight-knit circle will point to the "accomplishments" of the past nine months as reasons why he'll be missed. But take a look what the House has done this year and it's not hard to understand conservatives' frustrations with the Speaker's leadership: a permanent ?doc fix? that increases Medicare spending over the next two decades by $500 billion and took crucial leverage for Medicare reform off the table forever; a House-passed reauthorization of No Child Left Behind despite the objections of conservatives advocating reforms to eliminate Department of Education mandates. Not a single Republican ran on these priorities in 2014, yet aside from small-ball bills addressing business community concerns like authorization of the Keystone XL pipeline, they've been the central pillars of the Republican agenda.
But it could have been worse. Despite his best efforts, the Speaker wasn't able to roll conservatives on some of his biggest priorities. For years, he hoped to cut a "grand bargain," trading spending cuts for hundreds of billions of dollars in tax increases. Conservatives would not let him, and pressure from the grassroots forced the House instead to work toward the 2011 Budget Control Act, a package of cuts-only reforms that the Speaker has only tried to undermine ever since. And on comprehensive immigration reform "code-talk for amnesty"the Speaker never hid his views: "I think a comprehensive approach is long overdue. And I?m confident that the president, myself, others can find the common ground." As recently as last September, Speaker Boehner told Hugh Hewitt that he was trying to "create an environment where you could do immigration reform in a responsible way next year." It's taken years of dedicated opposition by conservatives to prevent the Speaker's push for amnesty from coming to fruition.
These were the fights John Boehner wanted to pick. Yet when conservatives have pressed Speaker Boehner to advance their own priorities, they have faced resistance from leadership every step of the way.
After President Obama's reelection, Speaker Boehner told ABC's Diane Sawyer that "the election changes" the GOP's approach to Obamacare. "It's pretty clear that the president was reelected, Obamacare is the law of the land," Boehner said. While he might have been previewing the Chamber of Commerce's new strategy, he certainly wasn't echoing the sentiment of his rank-and-file members or the party's conservative base.
In the aftermath of the president's unlawful executive amnesty, Speaker Boehner rightly condemned President Obama for his "legacy of lawlessness" and declared that "Republicans are left with the serious responsibility of upholding our oath of office." Less than three months later, after giving up the fight, the Speaker adopted President Obama's talking points about funding for the Department of Homeland Security and said that "with more active threats coming into the homeland," Congress could not use the power of the purse to fight for the Constitution.
Republican lawmakers and their constituents are watching the same disinclination to uphold their oath of office and use their constitutional prerogatives play out on Planned Parenthood. Although Speaker Boehner himself was remarkably cautious in his public statements, one his aides suggested any real attempt to defund Planned Parenthood could "damage the pro-life cause." It was a polite and delicate intimation of agreement with Senator Mitch McConnell, who said earlier this month that President Obama "made it very clear he's not going to sign any bill that includes defunding Planned Parenthood, so that's another issue that awaits a new president."
The Speaker and his allies consistently criticize the conservatives who demand these fights and dismiss their complaints as tactical objections, not policy disagreements. But when leadership in Congress consistently chooses to expend its energy primarily on achieving non-conservative policy over the objections of conservatives and to do all it can to avoid picking conservative fights?the disagreement isn't about tactics. It's a conflict of strategy born of a conflict of policy visions.
Here's the reality: In the past, politicians could afford to tell their constituents one thing and do something else entirely in office. The rapid advance of technology, however, has made that far more costly. Politicians and lobbyists no longer hold a monopoly on information. In fact, the ability of constituents all across the country to connect with one another and disseminate information means they can be more informed on both policy and process than some lawmakers.
In other words, the balance of power is starting to shift. The challenge for the Washington establishment in which Speaker Boehner was firmly entrenched is how to adapt to such a radical and empowering change in the political landscape. In the long run, the last year of turmoil in the GOP will prove to have been immensely positive. You had a Speaker who decided he was going to ignore the decentralizing influence of digital communication and try to govern with an iron fist ignoring the will of his voters. And that model has proven to be a complete failure.
Speaker Boehner's decision to step down empowers rank-and-file lawmakers to embrace the conservative grassroots and increases the likelihood the party will actually fight for conservative policy priorities and our Constitution. But that will not happen through inertia. It will take the concerted effort of lawmakers, staffers and conservative constituents to ensure the meaning of the moment is not lost.
No one should need an army of lawyers, lobbyists and accountants to succeed in this great nation. We have a chance to take back America, but it will require the Republican Party to fight for all Americans, not the powerful and well-connected.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/09/boehner-betrayed-his-party-213191
-
I never supported him to begin with. Nice to see my initial presumptions have been validated
-
What, exactly, did you do to support Boehner?
Just say you did not like him?
You cannot vote for the Speaker unless he is in your district.
I suppose you could send him money, but I am sure you have never sent a Speaker money.
It makes not a whit of difference whether we say we support a Speaker or not
-
What, exactly, did you do to support Boehner?
Must have missed the part where I made clear reference that I did NOT support Boehner, in being Speaker to begin with
Just say you did not like him?
You cannot vote for the Speaker unless he is in your district.
Mr Literal strikes again. Putting aside the deflection attempt, I never claimed I didn't like him, simply that I never supported him being Speaker.
News Flash, you can support or not support any damn thing you want, without having to be directly connected. I support people eating bananas. I don't support the Yankees winning the World Series. I support the Constitution. I don't support funding Planned Parenthood. Outside of that, ....... see what I mean? There is no required literal connection to support or not support x
It makes not a whit of difference whether we say we support a Speaker or not
Doesn't seem to stop you from bellyaching about your non-support of any of the GOP Presidential nominees. So why keep harping on your non-support if it makes not a whit of difference??
-
The Freedom Lobby, aka the Teabaggers are the ones that made life impossible for Boehner.
I imagine they will annoy his successor as much.
I see your support was of lesser value to Boehner than your Fruit of the looms are to your balls. Hardly worth mentioning.
-
Couldn't answer the question now could yas.......no surprise there. So, let's try asking it again....So why keep harping on your non-support of GOP Presidential nominees, if it makes not a whit of difference??
-
Because it is amusing to point and jeer at fools.
-
As in you have no answer, otherwise it spotlights the hypocrisy. News flash, it's already glaring, so not answering only demonstrates more in lack of credibility at this point.
Your call
-
<Points and jeers>
-
And thank you again for the validation of the point made. Whoever said your contributions weren't worthwhile 8)
-
You aren't worthwhile, sirs.
-
While your worth is immeasurable. I again thank you 8)
-
The Freedom Lobby, aka the Teabaggers are the ones that made life impossible for Boehner.
There you go.
Grassroots.
Support or non support does make a difference.
If the congressmen feel irritated by the people of the USA, I feel small sympathy.
-
I don't see the teabaggers as grassroots at all. And many of the teabagger representatives and senators are ignorant lunatics.
-
I don't see the teabaggers as grassroots at all.
How do you know this is not just you?
How is grassroots tested ?
-
Because......he doesn't want it to be, therefore it isn't
-
Well, it was financed the Kochs and organized by Jim DeMint. It has been an astroturf phenomena since Day One.
-
Financed?
Those crowds are not hired.
-
You do not need ton hire crowds of irate Americans. Just tell them that someone is coming to take away their guns or mess with Jeezus or give their jobs to furrinersand they come out in droves, waving their teabags.
"Always is and always was,
The royal race of hicks.
When Ahab came to Ashkelon,
They sold him gilded bricks."
-
You do not need ton hire crowds of irate Americans. Just tell them that someone is coming to take away their guns or mess with Jeezus or give their jobs to furrinersand they come out in droves, waving their teabags.
Yes !
We agree that this is genuine grassroots , I just respect the common man and you don't.
-
8)
-
Some of the common men ate ignorant, uneducated hicks.
Simpletons who understand nothing of diplomacy, geography or economics that want taxes to be low so they won't have to pay so much when they hit the Powerball, or when they buy out their boss like (chuckle, <snort!> Joe the Plumber.
-
So why do you want high turnout voting?
-
To put the Republican'ts in last place. They are useless.
-
So by dint of the vote of those who care and know the least , the Republicans are defeated.
When only the highly committed vote Republicans do well.
May God grant us a rainy November.