After yesterday, he must've realized that his religious beliefs were incompatible with the Republican Party.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...october-214056
After yesterday, he must've realized that his religious beliefs were incompatible with the Republican Party.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...october-214056
Forever Fredi
I think I'm gonna cry.
BedellBrave (09-25-2015), The Chosen One (09-25-2015)
The idea of McCarthy, Gowdy, Gohmert or a Tea Party posterchild being nominated Speaker disturbs me, but at the same time it means whoever that is would actually have to govern and compromise with POTUS, something the Tea Party does not want.
Forever Fredi
like the one before him
he blocked pretty much everything the President wanted to do through Congress and it still wasn't enough for the fanatics/radicals of the right wing
but i agree, when the Pope pretty much calls almost everything your party stands for wrong, i guess it strikes the bone to some catholics
"For there is always light, if only we are brave enough to see it. If only we are brave enough to be it." Amanda Gorman
"When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"
I think McConnell has been a bigger roadblock to POTUS than Boehner tbh.
Forever Fredi
We don't want roadblocks when our guy is POTUS and the other party holds the house and/or senate. It's obstructionism and a terrible evil when it is reversed. We are a funny though predictable lot.
Last edited by BedellBrave; 09-25-2015 at 09:29 PM.
weso1 (09-25-2015)
Well, people SAY they want compromise. Boehner, regardless of his occasional role as "obstructionist-in-chief," wanted to do a grand bargain on entitlement reform and immigration, two things that Americans say that they want. He had a willing partner in the White House and enough votes in the Senate. He was done in by his own caucus. Blocking the other party's agenda is one thing. The Tea Party types in the house have actually blocked meaningful progress towards compromise, over and over. Boehner's Speakership is a casualty of the fact that a small—but numerous enough—chunk of the House Republicans are rewarded by their constituents for cutting off their noses to spite their collective face.
50PoundHead (09-26-2015)
I was fine with the Grand Bargain which btw was based off of Bowles-Simpson a bipartisan group. Boehner and OBama were going to go through with the grand bargain but the Tea elements wanted nothing to do with it.
Forever Fredi
IMO the worst thing that could happen to the Repubs as far as Election 2016 is for one of the most radical TEA baggers to become Speaker. I think Bedell is right at least generally speaking. Most people just want their guy/girl to win, their point of view to get across, etc., but to be fair even as sucky as the Dems typically are I don't think there has EVER been a Congress/party that went into TOTAL obstruction mode as thoroughly as this Repub Congress. They may have a point about Obama's crappy plans, laws, etc., but to me they've crossed the line since day one that they took control. I can only imagine what crappy payback the Dems will employ once they get control of Congress back some day, since we all know the one thing Washington is good at, other than padding their own bank accounts at our expense, is getting payback for crap "the other party" did to them last year, last decade, heck even last century.
Are we back to the both sides do it / are to blame?
When in polling fact data says otherwise.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"A very slight plurality wants a candidate who will stick to their positions even if it means not getting things done. By contrast, the poll also finds that Democratic primary voters say by 60-35 that they want a candidate who will make compromises rather than stick to his or her positions."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/09/29/morning-plum-for-republicans-shunning-compromise-is-a-virtue/
Last edited by 57Brave; 09-29-2015 at 08:36 AM.