Skip to comments.Our Manifestly Unserious Republican House Leader
Posted on 03/10/2011 12:54:52 AM PST by DARCPRYNCE
House Speaker John Boehner is not a serious adult when it comes to addressing the out-of-control federal spending of the Democrat party. That is evident in his proposal to cut a largely inconsequential $61 Billion from the final seven months of this years budget.
(Excerpt) Read more at renewamerica.com ...
To give you a good idea of just how astoundingly weak Boehners proposal is, consider that the budget deficit for February of this year ALONE was $223 Billion, or almost four times the amount that the Speaker proposes to cut by years end.
Even if the Senate agrees to sign on to these cuts, Obamas obscene spending policies will still add another $1.6 Trillion to our already crippling and unsustainable $14.2 Trillion national debt.
Add to that, the fact that the President has crafted a monstrously irresponsible $3.7 Trillion budget for fiscal year 2012, and Boehner s $61 Billion scheme is exposed for the pathetic monetary joke that it is.
To put it bluntly, if the Republican leader of the House is not willing to propose at least $700 Billion in cuts this year in the hopes that he may be able to strike a $350 Billion deal down the road, then he has no business being Speaker, or even being a member of the GOP leadership.
Sure, I understand that the Speaker of the House has no power to force the democrat-controlled Senate or the President to accept such a proposal, but he does have the authority to set the budget-cutting negotiations bar as high as he likes.
I ask you, why allow the Democrat leadership to malign and demonize you over a mere $61 Billion in proposed budget reductions when they could easily be maligning and demonizing you over a number many times higher than that?
At the end of the day, youd have to be the most inept haggler in the world not to get at least a quarter of a Trillion dollars in cuts out of the bastards, and whats more, theyd come away from the experience understanding that you actually are what you said you were in November.
Unfortunately for us all, John Boehner is not what he claimed to be during the conservative electoral tsunami of 2010.
In fact, he is a demonstrably unmotivated, unremarkable and unserious individual. whos just made it painfully clear that he has no intention of confronting the tax-and-spend left in any appreciable way.
Edward L. Daley
Boehner is on the hairy edge of proving to be a failure.
Couldn’t agree more.
Boehner is a good example of why it’s not enough to vote Republican. We could have 100% of the House and Senate, and still lose ground with Republicans who simply do not get it.
We need someone audacious enough to demand the cuts that are needed. If it’s a newbie, then we need a sound procedural person to help with that end of things, while the novice speaker rams through what the country needs.
The days are gone when we can afford to let a guy like Boehner flail for a few years, then get rid of him.
If a guy doesn’t display that he gets it in a few weeks to a month, it’s time for new blood.
I know Newt is persona non grata on FR but he definitely knew how to play rough when he was house leader.
the problem here is that they are approaching this wrong.
to say they are introducing cuts... presupposes all the programs are already ‘in’. this is exactly opposite how it should be approached.
the US govt brings in roughly $2 trillion in revenue. subtract interest on the existing debt to be paid in the coming calendar year... and you have about $1.9 trillion to spend. assuming you wish to pay down the debt at all, which is currently $14 trillion, subtract another $200 billion (which is a drop in the $14 trillion bucket.. but it’s something).
this would leave $1.7 trillion for the coming years budget.
NOW... what do you wish to buy?
you only have $1.7 trillion to spend. no more. less would be good.
this way, EVERY govt spending program would have to vie for spending dollars.
how far from where we are now is this thinking? well, we are spending roughly $4.5 trillion per year right now.
stop the debt increase now, or this country will suffer the exact same fate as the USSR... which collapsed in a 4 day period due to its debt.
>> [could be a newbie]
We need a noob to make him cry... (cynicism speaking...)
The establishment needs the cooperation of the TPE class to settle law. So, let’s then lean on our representatives, the Tea Party reps, to do our bidding. As far as I can tell, these freshmen (inclusive of the wonderful lady lawmakers) are still stoked about their role is saving the Country — they haven’t yet been infected.
Sounds reasonable to me. I’m game.
This guy Boehner has to live in the real world where the Senate and the White House are controlled by the party of abortion and big government. The real test will come after we flush Ubama and the Senate rats down the toilet.
Bam Bam would get less than 1% of the unborn vote.
Boehner's staffer hung up on me last year--they don't want to be confrontational--they're compromised.
61 billion is one point six percent of 3600 billion.
It's time to get off the spray tan sound bite fake-o routine--Boehner pales when Democrats wave the bloody shirt of "government shutdown."
Grassley said Obama is the 900-pound gorilla and bears the blame if the government shuts down.
Meantime thirty-five percent live on the other sixty-five.
Time to tell the winged monkeys like David Gregory, yes, Obama does want to destroy America.
Rep. Mike Pence should of taken over as House Speaker, prior to the start of the present Congressional term!
you must be on acid.....Republicans (socialists) have been in control before and all we got was crap...Reagan’s worst enemy was the Republican (socialist) controled Senate. Gingrich was a bozo like the current House bozo.
Three terms of Bushites (socialists) brought us huge govenment and complete malfeasance in the financial sectors.
O’Keefe with a camera has done more than 20 years of Republicans (socialists)
Why buy a copy (Republican)(i.e.socialist) when you can get the real deal in a Democrat (communist)?
The newly elected tea-party members better be layin down some bodies and spill a whole bunch of blood real soon or they are toast as well. They are the ones at risk, sinced they promised (for the time being) not to be socialists, but they still are scared sh...less of taking on Obmummer on his usurpation.
We bascially need a Constitutional Convention to rewrite Article one.
The Big Boo
nothing but smoke and mirrors from him....he will sacrafice any principle to be able to be on friendly terms with Michelle and have the big zero call him now and then to pet him on his had...Obummer’s lap dog pretty much, all part of the DC Shuffle.
The Big Boo
I disagree with a need to rewrite any part of the Constitution. WE NEED TO ENFORCE WHAT WE HAVE.
A proposal to live within our means would force Congress to act like a business, with financial risk vs. rewards evaluation. The only good idea that Carter had was zero-based budgeting.
And I wouldn’t worry too much about the PUBs in Congress. After they nominate Juan McHuckneyani, they’ll go the way of the Whigs.
the lack of a balanced budget requirement is but one good reason to rewrite the Constitution. Another is to severly limit the powers of Congress, set up two term limits in the House and one term limits in the Senate...there are alot of things that are wrong with the Constitution and can’t be fixed by “enforcing it as is” because the “enforcers” i.e. current socialists and communists have no intention of doing that.
The founders would all aprrove and never felt that the document was somehow sacred and immutable to change. They just made it very difficult to change (perhaps another flaw).
But in the end this is all BS...we are doomed as it stands now and that won’t change. The U.S. will cease to exist within 5-10 years. There has been much more put into motion, behind the scenes that anyone is aware of by the Obummer.
The Big Boo
as an example of “doomed”, allow me to translate Hoyer’s recent statement that the budget couldn’t be balanced for 20 years. As a Democrat (communist) he is right, but what he really was saying was this: “if we really, really tried, and cut everything to the bone, and raised taxes and exhibited tremendous never seen before discipline, the buget could be balanced in twenty years. But there is no way that will happen. We will continue to spend and implode with the help of the Republicans (socialists) when we can get it, without them when we can’t. As a Democrat (communist) I am fine with that as the sooner the U.S. implodes, flies off the cliff and dies the happier I am.”
You have to learn to tranlate these goons to get to their real meanings...
The Big Boo
Texas will NEVER perish from this earth.
WWND: what would Nancy do?
Do you think for one second that Nancy Pelosi would worry who was in the Senate or what they might think about her agenda? Not just no, Hell NO.
One thing I absolutely love about the House is that we get a crack at it again in another 18 months or so, along with some Senators we missed the last time. I think that we were pretty clear on our priorities for this congress. The fact that the elected are ineffective is really their problem to worry about if they like the jobs that they have now.
Here is a take away for you though. The Senate cannot spend a dime of our money, not one thin dime. The ruckus we’re currently raising as voters is about spending, that is the responsibility of the House and Speaker “Boner” and Majority Leader Cantor.
Had a good primary lately?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.