Posted on 12/11/2014 4:56:48 PM PST by xzins
COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS
$330,000,000
What about for good hard working people who lose theirs homes because of cancer.
We are so screwed in this country.
Excellent editorial. There’s no doubt Boehner has betrayed we the people and his own party’s rules.
A man of integrity (he lacks in both categories) would step down now but of course a man of integrity would never have betrayed us in the first place.
The House should replace him with a Patriot who will not kowtow to the juvenile in the WH.
Our power went out shortly before you posted this and didn’t come on until sometime late, sorry I missed it until now.
Singing my song.
Check out this prediction as response to my saying that Boehner's going no-where.
To: sickoflibs
Boehner will resign his position after this debacle plays out to some sort of a deal that is further capitulation to Obama. Boehener’s done.
28 posted on Thursday, December 20, 2012 11:02:43 PM by jimbo123
This is much to do about nothing, MSNBC is having a huge laugh over this continued silliness
FNC Babe Megyn Kelly gave this what it deserved today.
She said that they vote to keep him Speaker because none of the others want it, but maybe make him wait for it with a symbolic vote or two for more symbolism, then ‘by tomorrow it will all be forgotten’, and she had the funniest ‘Oh brother’ look on her face too, it was perfect.
19 posted on Thursday, January 03, 2013 2:06:39 PM by sickoflibs
Fools!
This is an excellent editorial, xzins. Unfortunately, too many of the Republicans seem to want Boehner. Only 67 Republicans voted against this bill. Of those 67, how many voted no because Boehner already had enough votes?
Trivia question: What congressman was the one who's idea began the behind the scenes movement to oust Newt as Speaker of The House. What was that congressman's name? Anyone?
Jeepers...
http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=353722
I do think conservatives should seriously consider my suggestion that we pick 10 or 12 (I’m upping the number) Republican Congressmen and absolutely tank them in 2016. First, they get a primary, and if the primary fails to dislodge them, we give the seat to the Democrats. We actively vote for the Democrat. Whatever happens, we retire their asses.
Always an excellent question. There is no doubt that some of them did. My guess is that we look only at those most vulnerable to being primaried and we'd get a good idea.
Oh, how quickly some of us FReepers are willing to reach "instant conclusions" about developing events! At this point, pretty much on the basis of "gossip."
Consider what you have said here, dear brother xzins. You allege that Speaker Boehner willfully engaged in collusion, conspiracy with Obama in a "background deal to betray our side." That side presumably being the cause of conservatism — social, economic, and constitutional.
If I may, I would like to volunteer for the role of devil's advocate here, "devil's advocate" defined as follows:
In common parlance, a devil's advocate is someone who, given a certain argument, takes a position they do not necessarily agree with (or simply an alternative position from the accepted norm), for the sake of debate or to explore the thought further. In taking this position, the individual taking on the devil's advocate role seeks to engage others in an argumentative discussion process. The purpose of such a process is typically to test the quality of the original argument and identify weaknesses in its structure, and to use such information to either improve or abandon the original, opposing position. It can also refer to someone who takes a stance that is seen as unpopular or unconventional, but is actually another way of arguing a much more conventional stance. The background of this word comes from an official position within the Catholic Church, in which a canon lawyer called the Devil's Advocate, also known as the Promoter of Faith, "argued against the canonization (sainthood) of a candidate in order to uncover any character flaws or misrepresentation evidence favoring canonization."As DA, some thoughts:
(1) Your characterization of Boehner is that he is a man who is both stupid and unprincipled. Not to mention that, by seemingly working with a lawless president, is himself an avid accessory to the promulgation of Evil in American society.
(2) The fact that he is a master of the institutional history, procedures and practice of the U.S. Congress is counted against him: the supposition being that he is manipulating the rules for his own self-aggrandisement, or the aggrandisement of "his" Party that represents nothing but advancing its own political welfare and interests (at great taxpayer expense, of course).
Jeepers, that seems to be quite a leap — a leap encouraged by such political players as Ted Cruz, who seemingly demands "instant redress" for public wrongs — such as Obamacare and Executive Orders relating to immigration. In short, I gather Ted Cruz thinks that what could have been accomplished in less than three weeks absolutely cannot wait until the next Congress is seated — when it would have definite positive strength in terms of sheer numbers as compared with the situation right now.
Don't get me wrong; I find Ted Cruz strongly attractive in his policy analyses and prescriptions. I just find him still "wet behind the ears." He is a political neophyte who has not yet "won his spurs," who has a whole lot left to learn. That is, he needs seasoning before I could regard him as a serious candidate for my vote in the 2016 presidential election. (I could say the same about Rand Paul.)
(3) The thought has occurred to me that Boehner and Obama may be involved in a chess game here. Were that the case, I'd allow that Boehner may be two or three moves ahead of his opponent. Time will tell.
In short, this Devil's Advocate is not willing to throw Boehner under the proverbial bus just yet. Moreoever, I'm glad for a three-week reprise over the Christmas season not to have to think about these things, just now.
We'll know a whole lot more about how matters proceed, beginning with the seating of the next Congress, in January.
One thing I do know, and know that Boehner also knows it, is that any positive law enacted by Congress absolutely trumps any previously enacted Executive Order, rendering it completely Null and Void.
The trick will be to maneuver Obama into vetoing such positive law nullifying his excrescences and usurpations as ersatz POTUS. That would be great fun!!!
So, stay tuned! Be patient!!! Pray often!!!
Thank you so very much for sharing your thoughts, dear brother in Christ!
When Bush had the Presidency and the GOP had the majority in the Senate and the house the conservatives got nothing. Nada.
Boehner is not an astute conservative, he is a dyed in the wool establishment corporatist. He is also a treacherous liar. Don’t try to sugar coat him. He is a poison pill.
People say that the November 4th Midterm results indicated some kind of a voter mandate going forward.
The only "voter mandate" that I see expressed in this election was the mandate "to please stop the suffering" of the American Middle Class occasioned by the Obama Administration and its cohorts in Congress and beyond.
That is hardly a full-blown detailed commitment of the American people to what the GOP might propose as the rectifying alternative to the chaos that has beset our country thanks to our non-president and his administration.
The GOP was given an "edge" in the last election. What they will do with it remains to be seen. But it seems to me they have to come up with an attractive alternative to the way business is conducted in our nation's Capitol. And then they need to persuasively communicate this, particularly to the American Middle Class and their concerns, who are the main victims of Obama's "transformational presidency."
If we can't do that, then "we" are history.
Well, we definitely have your "take" on this issue, P-Marlowe!
And you know all this — how???
Do you want to bet the farm on it?
Time will tell, dear brother!
Hi Betty,
My analysis, as the post you cited indicated, wasn’t an analysis. It was a recounting of the words that I heard come out of Representative Bachman’s mouth. BACHMAN, an experienced member of the same House of Congress as Boehner, said that he had a backroom deal with Obama. Later, Louis Gohmert, another long-time member of the House, said that Boehner was a member of the other side.
Now, there’s not much analysis that needs to be done there. There is simply the recounting of what these long-time, respected members of Congress had determined about Boehner based on their insider information.
Commenting on the idea of Boehner wanting to use the power of the next Congress, that specifically isn’t the issue, since they just negated much of the impact of the new Congress by pushing the spending cap all the way until September of 2015 (the same month, incidentally, as the first Republican Presidential debate). They have taken the power of the purse out of the hand of Congress.
And, as Louis Gohmert suggested at that same time, the Congress is not going to vote to defund Homeland Security. He said that they will not choose to go before the American people saying that the Border Patrol is no longer being paid or paid for.
So, Gohmert’s take is that this is a fool’s bargain. Mine is that it sounds Quisling like.
Well I guess that tells us everything we need to know about "where you're coming from" on this long-festering problem, dear brother in Christ.
You assume the posture of judge and jury on the Speaker of the House — the foremost spokesperson of the "People's House." I detect more animosity than evidence at this juncture.
FWIW, I gather that you are a lawyer by profession. Lawyers must be "people of the book" in order to executive their mission.
The problem that I see here, is that "people of the book" are people who are totally married to "doctrine," whatever the doctrine may be. It could be civil law, or even the doctrine made manifest in Holy Scripture.
It seems to me that the Holy Scriptures were intended by God to illuminate human experience, in a specifically God-to-Man communication. That Man might know from whence he came, and where he is ultimately going.
Rules of human positive law cannot possibly reach to such a sublime summit of divine–human understanding.
Any "court of law" that falls short of such an understanding is ultimately false in the end; for it would be, by definition, "all too human."
Go figure!
Thanks so much for weighing in!!!
Yeah. Effective til next time this comes up for public debate. In a new Congress.
Question: Why did Michelle Bachman "retire?" Was she out of ammo, or what?
As for that darling person Louis Gohmert: What's his excuse for acting like a total ninny? (IMHO, FWIW) for aping such absurdity?
Do you think that Louis Gohmert has a crystal ball, whereby he can know, infallibly, in advance, that "Congress is not going to defund Homeland Security?" And he KNOWS this — HOW???
Gohmert is a very good, basically sound man, IMHO. It seems he represents many people who have a bad case of the jitters nowadays regarding the American future. At least such people as are paying attention to recent "political" developments. I trust that Gohmert would really like to help resolve such difficulties....
Notwithstanding, I do not find what he has done so far particularly helpful....
And Michelle is off the stage now....
My point, Betty, is that my post was not analysis. It was reporting the words of House members who have inside information and insider, informed opinions.
So, in terms of my insider credentials or your insiders credentials, it really doesn’t matter much if Bachman is retiring or Gohmert doesn’t pass muster with some. What matters is that they ARE members of the House and aware of much that we non-insiders simply don’t know.
And in terms of months and sessions of Congress, to run a spending authority all the way to the end of the fiscal year (Sep 2015) is to take away from the authority of the new congress in crucial money matters. That is not conjecture. Assuming the Senate passes this CRomnibus, Boehner and crew have made the new Congress less powerful.
And you know all this — how???
(about Bohner being a poison pill..)
Because of his known documented activities as Speaker..
The things he has DONE... but more by the things he has not done but could’ve easily HAVE done..
BUT DIDN’T.........(on purpose)...................
AND because he himself, with help, has FINANCED all that Obama has done..
Shutting the federal givernment down IS NOT SHUTTING the givernment down...
Because we American have Three distinct givernments..
Federal, State and Local..
WITH State givernment being the most important..
and operator(the state) of all the most important Infrastructure..
The federal givernment is a PAPER givernment.. not tangible..
ALL federal givernment assests are CEDED to it by the States.. and the citizens of States..
SHUTTING the federal governmnet down will do LITTLE to effect average Americans..
UNLESS SSI payments are stopped or delayed..
THEN OLD people will literally HANG THE BLIGHTER..
So, have you ended with the DA, or was that ongoing through each post?
I'm taking a wait-and-see attitude until the new Congress is sworn in. I would rather there had been a short term budget to kick the can down the road for the next Congress, but what's done is done.
How the incoming Congress deals with the various crises - Immigration, Obamacare, Economy - will be telling. Perhaps the passing of this monster will free up time for them to kill Obamacare, etc.
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.