Posted on 12/11/2014 4:56:48 PM PST by xzins
The only ethical response to betrayal by one's own leader is to find a new leader.
There have been famous betrayals, but for America one stands out. Benedict Arnold was a general in the American Revolution. Thousands of officers and enlisted followed him, obeyed him, attended to his every word. That was prior to September 21, 1780 and his plot with the British to turn over the critically strategic ground of West Point to the British in exchange for money and position. After his betrayal of his country, it would have been a strange thing indeed to have found his troops arguing that they still owed Arnold that same loyalty as they had before. After all, his own actions had violated the trust they had placed in him.
During the Speakership of Dennis Hastert (Republican, Illinois) Hastert verbalized the idea that a speaker who relied on the minority party to pass a bill was violating the trust of his fellow majority members. Hastert said that it was not his job to push legislation that had been rejected by most of those who had elected him to the office of Speaker of the House. The unofficial rule is that a majority of the majority party must support a bill before it is brought to a vote. Otherwise, a Speaker is using cronies to permit the minority party to rule the House of Representatives.
During his time as Speaker, John Boehner has violated the Hastert Rule six times, and even though Boehner himself once rejected the idea of passing bills with minority party votes, he has used this method of passing spending bills that would have been rejected by his own supporters.
Boehner's most famous betrayal was last February 2014 when he had support from only a mere TWENTY-EIGHT Republican representatives but still put a so-called 'clean debt ceiling' bill up for vote. That bill passed by a vote of 221-201, overwhelmingly democratic. Boehner had obviously betrayed the trust of his supporters while heeding the voices of 28 cronies against the vast majority of his own people.
Much was made this past election about those who were shunned in their House races for election when they suggested that they might not support Boehner for Speaker in the new Congress that takes power in January 2015. Marilinda Garcia had funds withheld by the Republican Campaign Committee when she hinted that she would not support Boehner for Speaker. http://www.redstate.com/2014/10/06/nrcc-withholds-funds-after-marilinda-garcia-nh-02-says-she-may-not-vote-for-boehner/
At best, this is a new member of the Republican House being told that loyalty is expected of its members. At worst, it is campaign extortion. In either case, however, there is the message being sent from the Speaker that support should be forthcoming from the membership toward the leadership.
But support is a two way street.
Arnold expected support from his troops. He was their general. He had been victorious in battle, had suffered hardship alongside them, and had even shared the danger of the heat of battle. In many ways he had earned their respect and their support.
But his betrayal canceled all that. He went over to the other side. He put his own troops at grave risk. He is justly condemned by history. His name has become a byword for traitor.
A leader who turns to his enemy to win a victory for the enemy over his own troops and their interests is rightly called a "Benedict Arnold."
Speaker Boehner has willingly betrayed his own troops in the past. If he does so in this matter of a funding bill that permits our lawless President to pay for illegal immigrants to receive status and benefits, then Boehner has betrayed not just his own caucus, but he has betrayed the huge majority of voters who chose republicans this past November to stop amnesty, to stop ObamaCare, to stop out-of-control spending, and to stop a chaotic foreign policy.
Boehner will steal one entire year of power from the Congress that has not yet taken office, for their power of funding will be neutered until September of 2015. He will betray the support his own people have shown him by siding with the enemy.
He will also violate the terms of his understanding with those who were to support him for Speaker. They give loyalty in return for loyalty. They give support in return for support. They will have been betrayed.
There will be zero reason to continue him as Speaker of the House. The only ethical response to betrayal by one's own leader is to find a new leader.
Well done. Well written, factual, and concise. It belongs in Freeper Editorial, if it is not there already.
As far as Boehner, I did not know he had violated the Hassert Rule six times. It makes sense, though, being as he is a bought-and-paid-for Chamber of Communism lackey. Of course, when they are not directing him, he falls back on his far-left liberalism that he seems to have adopted.
We have as a choice, far-left liberalism to an absurd measure (Democrats) or far-left liberalism (Republicans).
Nossir. They are not hurt; they are doing exactly as they are inclined. The Republican party has been completely coopted by the far-left.
No question the quisling Boehner has to go. This guy spells complete disaster for the GOP in the next two years.
I must leave the GOP tent: the stench inside is unbearable.
Did you happen to listen to Rep Bachman last night? She absolutely said that Boehner had a backroom deal with Obama to betray our side. She even gave the date when Boehner met with Obama.
Then Louis Gohmert says the same thing. Gohmert said ON PUBLIC LAST NIGHT that Boehner is a member of the other side.
The Republican party has been completely coopted by liberal Democrats. This is what one-party rule looks like.
Did you happen to listen to Rep Bachman last night? She absolutely said that Boehner had a backroom deal with Obama to betray our side. She even gave the date when Boehner met with Obama.
Then Louis Gohmert says the same thing. Gohmert said ON PUBLIC TV LAST NIGHT that Boehner is a member of the other side.
Is there a way of finding out each line item in “Cromnibus” with a break down of where every dime is going?
He's not going anywhere. Do not refer to the GOP any more, they are the D.O.P.E.s. That stands for Democrats Other Party Establishment.
This guy spells complete disaster for the GOP in the next two years.
The disaster just came and is final. Illegals will be voting by the millions in 2016 and beyond. There won't even be a Republican party in name any more.
It was clear to me the last few weeks that the media, including Fox, was refusing to deal with the real issues involved in this omnibus bill: it hasn’t even been read, it funds abortion, it supports ObamaCare, it supports amnesty. In fact, it undercuts the Congressional power to stop Obama already written into law by the Simpson/Mazzoli act, because it can be interpreted as giving Obama Congressional approval that is required by the law before any social security numbers/cards can be assigned.
Conservatives have now been thoroughly and completely betrayed.
We have no party representing us in Washington DC. But the handwriting was on the wall. Media and our own politicians have refused to even try to stir up conservatives to oppose these things.
Then they willingly turned to the CIA report debate that almost completely hid what the politicians were doing behind closed doors. That was no accidental release of a CIA report. It was timed to kill discussion on CRomnibus.
We must turn now to God. We have no party to turn to.
I saw a link in some article on FR about where it has finally been posted. I forget which article. I’ll look around. Maybe I can find it again.
Rand Paul On Shutdown: "Even Though It Appeared I Was Participating In It, It Was A Dumb Idea"I said throughout the whole battle that shutting down the government was a dumb idea. Even though it did appear as if I was participating in it, I said it was a dumb idea. And the reason I voted for it, though, is that it's a conundrum. Here's the conundrum. We have a $17 trillion debt and people at home tell me you can't give the president a blank check. We just can't keep raising the debt ceiling without conditions. So unconditionally raising the debt ceiling, nobody at home wants me to vote for that and I can't vote for that. But the conundrum is if I don't we do approach these deadlines. So there is an impasse. In 2011, though, we had this impasse and the president did negotiate. We got the sequester. If we were to extend the sequester from discretionary spending to all the entitlements we would actually fix our problem within a few years.[Posted on 11/19/2013 12:16:51 PM by Third Person]
FUJB
FUJB
FUJB
What do you think Paul just said in that comment?
I heard him say that they had to vote for funding but that not funding would have led perhaps to another sequester which would have been a good idea.
So, it’s a good idea to vote for a bad idea which will prevent you from achieving a good idea.
Did I get it?
As it turns out this did NOT break the Hastert rule. In fact a majority of the majority voted for this. 162 Republicans voted yes and only 67 voted no. Boehner must go = yes 100% agreement. However, we have 161 other republicans that we need to get rid of also.
Yes, it did not. I agree with that...so far. If the Senate sends this to conference, then we might see another vote. It’s probably over, but not quite over yet.
However, look at post #87.
I had no idea there was this level of disrespect for Boehner WITHIN the House itself. Bachman and Gohmert are saying that THIS betrayal had ALREADY taken place.
So, given that, Boehner should go.
I think somewhere at this link you can find out what is actually happening with the bill.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/83
Anyone interested in reading this porculus have at it.
Still looking for a line item spending spreadsheet to see how much of this is government waste.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CPRT-113HPRT91668/pdf/CPRT-113HPRT91668.pdf
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.