E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Republicans are poised to make significant gains this fall. They need to pick up 39 seats to take control of the House. It's unclear they will do that, but if they do Minority Leader John Boehner would likely become speaker, replacing Nancy Pelosi.
"What Would Speaker Boehner Do" got a fresh look today in an interview with the conservative Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. (Some of it is on camera.)
He was critical of the financial reform bill, saying it was akin to "killing an ant with a nuclear weapon;" He said health care should be repealed and would act to shut off the supply of money to the law; And he said the administration has overreacted to the Gulf oil spill, according to the paper.
Here are some excerpts:
On financial reform:
Boehner criticized the financial regulatory overhaul compromise reached last week between House and Senate negotiators as an overreaction to the financial crisis that triggered the recession. The bill would tighten restrictions on lending, create a consumer protection agency with broad oversight power and give the government an orderly way to dissolve the largest financial institutions if they run out of money.
"This is killing an ant with a nuclear weapon," Boehner said.
On the GOP:
"The American people have written off the Democrats. They're willing to look at us again."
On Washington leaders, he strikes a Tea Party tone:
"They're snuffing out the America that I grew up in," Boehner said. "Right now, we've got more Americans engaged in their government than at any time in our history. There's a political rebellion brewing, and I don't think we've seen anything like it since 1776."
On health care:
"We are going to do everything we can to make sure that this law and this program never really takes effect. They're going to need money from the Congress to hire these 20,000-plus bureaucrats they need to hire to make this program work. They're not going to get one dime from us."
On the oil spill:
Boehner said Obama overreacted to the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The spill might warrant a "pause" in deepwater drilling, but Obama's blanket ban on drilling in the gulf -- which a judge overturned last week -- could devastate the region's economy, he said.
On Social Security:
"On Social Security, we're all livin' a lot longer than anybody ever expected, and I think raising the retirement age, going out 20 years not affecting anyone close to retirement and eventually getting the retirement age to 70 is a step that needs to be taken."
Is he suggesting "spreading the wealth"?
"We need to look at the American people and explain to them that we're broke and that if you have substantial non-Social Security income while you're retired, why are we paying you at a time when we're broke."
Leave a Comment:
Don't count your chickens BEFORE they HATCH
Nancy Pelosi will still have her Foot on the back of Gooper necks after the election
Too bad she can't get any help from the Administration that can't shoot straight
No sense of urgency from this Administration.... No drive to get things done .... Stall on Financial reform until Byrd dies to make it even Harder to do and weaker in the end .....
You're talking about Congress, Sierra -- that should be "don't count your boobies before they hatch."
Boehner is a corporate flunky. If America is so duped by the electoral process to give these Yahoos the needed seats for this to happen, then we deserve to go back to the stone ages. 'Statistically this... statistically that' blah, blah, blah, blah... forget statistics and forget patterns... President Obama and the Democratically controlled chambers are doing their best with what they have.
There is no reason this country should continue to take steps backwards when so much is riding on moving forward.
The party of 'NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN!!' will realize that the people (independents and moderates) have been listening to the deafening nightengales only to realize that it was a bunch of noise and no solutions.
Besides with all the confused candidates and schizophrenic TEA baggers, the party will be too splintered to vote for any sure candidate... 2008 2.0 Acid Redux of ROMNEYMCSAMEHUCKERY SYNDROME.
‘…Attempting to reverse 15 years of federal subsidies for offshore drilling,...’
WHO KNEW ?
We’re SUBSUDIZING Oil Companies to DRILL FOR OIL ?
'...Renewable fuels receive fewer federal subsidies than fossil fuels, according to a 2009 study that Feinstein cited....'
Who needs renewable energy, anyway ??
From SFGate.com:
‘…Feinstein wants to limit oil drilling subsidies
(06-29) 04:00 PDT Washington -- Attempting to reverse 15 years of federal subsidies for offshore drilling, California Sen. Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation Monday that would repeal "royalty relief" programs and other incentives to explore for oil and gas in the deep waters off U.S. coasts.
Feinstein wants a permanent ban on all such drilling, which has solid support among her fellow Democrats on the West Coast but faces insuperable opposition in the gulf states.
Short of a ban, Feinstein wants to end subsidies for drilling in the wake of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Subsidies for drilling "to me make no sense," Feinstein said, adding that the money should go instead to alternative energy.
Feinstein singled out two laws for repeal. The "Deep Water Royalty Relief Act," enacted in 1995 under the Clinton administration, granted the federal government a "holiday" from royalty payments on leases sold from 1996 to 2000.
The "Energy Policy Act of 2005," enacted during the Bush administration, mandated the elimination of royalty payments on oil from deep wells when prices fall below a certain level, providing a direct incentive for deepwater drilling. It is set to expire soon, and Feinstein's move to repeal it is likely to pass, aides said.
More controversial will her effort to eliminate the discretion of the secretary of the interior to reduce royalty payments.
Renewable fuels receive fewer federal subsidies than fossil fuels, according to a 2009 study that Feinstein cited...'
Will the Obama Administration DO ANYTHING about this ??
Oh, heavenly day ... if Boehner was wasn't sporting a god delusion before, he will be now. Well, at least those flowing white robes will look good against that Coppertone tan. Until it rubs off, as god complexes so often do.
Anna,
This would be my worst nightmare behind Sarah Palin being elected President.
US Navy Disabled Veteran - Retired-
I had the same thought!
OMG!
Those two idiots don't have an IQ above 100 between them. Imagine them running the country.
Neither of them can even read a sentence without stammering!
OMG!
LoL Me, too. Or how about a Boehner/Palin ticket?
There is a lot being said by a lot of people from different perspectives and to justify different biases, so what does simple, honest common sense say versus just being conned?
JOBS: Reducing taxes for the very wealthy really only guarantees more money for them, as companies only expand and create more jobs based on the supporting market and that means when the public is spending in a strong economy. The current status, where banks and companies have money but are holding back waiting for the market to turn, is a prime example of what really happens. The con that giving the very few more money will stimulate them to spend on creating jobs is illogical as they realize to expand before the market supports it is literally flirting with disaster.
TAXES: Worrying about taxes now is like ‘putting the cart before the horse’ as it is a valid concern only for those who presently have it abundantly. Those without or who are stretched thin would be glad to have a larger tax burden based on a robust economy providing them a larger income. Even the upper middle class should see that a larger net is what is really important. The con that increased taxes are a real current threat is unfounded and is self-serving for only the few.
‘SOCIALISM v CONSERVATISM’ and the ECONOMY: Government spending should be seen as ‘priming the pump’ even when creating more government jobs than private sector jobs. As the government spends, creating government jobs and buying services and supplies from the private sector (and repairing long neglected infrastructure and services), it puts money into the economy and stimulates individual spending, which then grows the private sector, encouraging recovery and a resulting robust economy. Effective social programs also help in bringing the poor up to contribute to an overall sound and, again, robust economy that benefits everyone, including even generating recyclable profits for companies and the wealthy. The con that ‘Socialism’ is a bad term and ‘Conservatism’ is the appropriate way really attempts to use extremes as emotional appeals just to manipulate public opinion.
‘CENTRIST’: The Bush-Cheney years clearly demonstrated that giving Carte Blanche to Special Interests and catering to the influential, powerful and extremely wealthy few fails miserably and ultimately costs the vast majority significantly. Their gross dishonesty and unconscionable irresponsibility represented a severe sociopathic mentality that was rationalized as ‘conservative’. Extreme and enduring ‘socialism’ is not the answer for America either. A non-extreme ‘centrist’ position is the only rational approach and the con is when either extreme is advocated, as neither totally benefits more than just a few.
DEFICIT: The deficit is a serious concern that needs to be both viewed realistically and then addressed responsibly. To insure the ability to sustain a strong and worldwide competitive economy the deficit has to be responsibly resolved. Not to do so would just result in run-away inflation and a drastic devaluation of the dollar … but to curtail government spending before reestablishing the economy on strong footing would be to encourage extreme deflation and a depression. The key is to be responsibly addressing the problem and the con is to fault whatever the opposition is doing.
‘TRICKLE DOWN’ v ‘BUBBLE UP’: The touted ‘trickle down’ theory has proven to be a fraud that benefits only those at the very top as their spending neither necessarily benefits the majority nor does giving them more necessarily stimulate them to spend more. The economy literally functions more as a ‘bubble up’ where when with spending power from the bottom up then the spending throughout stimulates profits and successes that are recycled and do create benefit for everyone. The con is in the saying that giving more to those who already spend whatever they want, will stimulate the economy by their spending more in a way that benefits everyone.
‘REGULATIONS’ v ‘DEREGULATION’: After what we have experienced there should be no doubt that ‘deregulation’, ‘open markets’ and ‘small government’ can be rationalizations to justify an irresponsible lack of rules, lax enforcement and non-existent oversight that allows run-away greed, self indulgence and gross dishonesty to run havoc and cost everyone, except a very few, drastically. History shows that this mentality, which is much like ‘pyramid schemes’, has cycled through crisis after crisis in Savings & Loans, Banks, dotcoms, real estate, financial & investment industries and always with a very few winning significantly while the vast majority looses greatly. Again a ‘centrist’ position is needed and the con is that a ‘conservative’ open market mentality is better.
POLITICAL REFORM: There are three obvious truths about political reform: one, is it is desperately needed; two, that it literally can’t be accomplished without eliminating the control of the money people, needing to get money out of politics; and three, the incumbents, the lobbyists and the influential, powerful and extremely wealthy few will fight reform like mad. The con would be that they are expressing their rights which America needs to protect.
All of the above are just very basic common sense evaluations but many times we overlook the simple, especially when being bombarded with a lot of subterfuge and emotional appeals aimed to sway us and manipulate public opinion. I personally think everyone needs to think for themselves, being rational and objective, to resist the scare tactics and the emotional appeals to biases, prejudices and attachments. The politicians who are ‘puppets’ for Special Interests and the select few are at fault but the voters who buy into the subterfuge are equally the problem. There are those who literally only have their ambitions in mind and to allow ourselves to be conned by them will provide absolutely no solace or relief later.
Rgiles,
Wish I could give you more than one vote. Excellent work. THank you.
RGiles, EXCELLENT post, very well balanced and thought out, you are to be commended and this certainly has my vote!
It is premature and presumptive to think John Boehner will become speaker of the House. Only in John's mind will he become speaker.
and even then he has nothing of value to say,...other than:
HELL NO YOU CAN'T!
What!
How in the heck can the administration have overreacted to the gulf oil spill according to Boehner and underreacted according to Jindal, other Republicans and based on polls according to a large number of the American public.
Boehner's plans are clear. Obstructionism. Not only on issues that some may agree need to be slowed down or even killed, but on anything this administration proposes.
If the American public wants continued obstructionism for the sake of obstructionism in Washington then give power back to the Republicans in Congress.
Do people in Ohio really have a clue as to what they were electing when sending Boehner to Congress? This guy gets the bone head of the year award and is right there along side Palin and Bachmann as the most gutless, brainless twerps in politics.
MSierra, I disagree with you. This Administration cannot do everything. Where are our Democractic leaders for goodness sakes? What about the left, who haven't seen a day where they haven't whined. (Because after all, it is all about them). It was THEY and THEY alone who got the Dems the majorities. At least that's what they say, day in, day out.
Nancy Pelosi does not deserve this. But it's what's going to happen. The left doesn't care.
And if we lose the House, there is no more progressive anything. Especially power. They will have let it all blow up in their faces. Again.
Because it was always about them and assuming they could dictate to this President on how to govern once he was elected. You think the right is nasty?
Pay attention to the left. Not all of them. Just the more visible ones. They're full of themselves and their perceived level of power. It has nothing to do with the President or Nancy Pelosi. They don't care about them. They care only for themselves. They want to be able to say - We told you so.
Most of us Democrats think we need more Democrats. Some on the left think it's okay to just walk away without a fight. Progressives aren't so progressive after all. Especially when they don't get their own way.
Thurgood Marshall pushed no one but himself. No media attention. No insulting. No groupies. Just one step at a time, making a difference and changing the make up of this country, forever.
With dignity and sincerity. And never ever giving up.
A true Democrat. In every sense of the word.
I am 100% with you on this. There is too much me, me, me and not enough we or us. As a democrat and proud of it, I still have a big problem with the infighting. Some just will not do anything to help unless there is something in it for them, not us the people that elected the idiot, but them. If we democrats do not come together and unify our voting power we are going to be in trouble. Having bone head as speaker in a nightmare only surpassed by Sarah Palin being elected President. You got a vote.
You are so right, Pat--witness Russ Feingold not voting for the banking reform act because it isn't liberal enough. So what--it is a start. I will give the Republicans credit for their ability to stick together and stay on message. Too bad that the message is so repugnant--they do stay with it. If Boehner is Speaker, maybe he'll get us all deals on tanning products and golf equipment.
OHHH the HORROR...
Just the sound of Speaker Boner sends chills down my spine!
Progressives we NEED to stay organized and motivated to make SURE that doesn't happen!
The GOBP are going to get their asses handed to them come November, the American people are fed up with the party of no and this phony deficet crap.
I agree with his comments on financial reform. This financial reform is a knee-jerk reaction to a recession (not a depression as some would like to believe). A consumer protection agency is not needed. Let the consumer take care of himself. We don't need the government to hold our hand for every decision do we? Also, banks that are willing to loan credit to low credit people and business, had better be able to withstand the risk of default. We shouldn't have to bailout banks that make poor business decisions.
On health care reform, I think that our current health care system needs to change, but not with any public option or universal coverage. We need to clean up the inefficiencies. I also think that we should start helping doctors/surgeons with their school loans. I've seen how much it cost to go to medical school and I see how much medicaid and medicare reimburse these physicians. Because medicare and medicaid reimburse at sometimes 60% of the total charge, physicians will raise rates on private insurers, which in turn will raise rates for the insured.
On the oil spill, I do think that we need to start developing alternative energy sooner rather than later. Let's start by keeping the offshore oil ban, and building nuclear power plants in the gulf communities. They have tons of water that can be used as coolant for the uranium rods. There are also a couple of states that are willing to take spent rods for a fee, which will also put money into those states coffers.
There should be higher retirement credits on tax returns to urge people to save for retirement. I would hate for there to be a policy requiring people to save for retirement, but if that's the only way to make people plan ahead, then so be it. Social Security should be a supplement to your retirement income, not your whole retirement income.
I have a couple of serious questions. Why would you accept mandatory saving for retirement but say no to universal health care? Where would you draw a line at consumer protection, where is it required? I mean, the FDA is a consumer protection organization so everybody doesn't have to do their own food safety testing, public safety organizations are essentially consumer protection agencies, protecting people against the illegal and dangerous acts of others. These are just examples. Should these agencies and organizations be abolished? Why not a consumer protection agency for the financial industry to protect against unscrupulous people or misrepresented financial products?
Cult of Personality:
I'm not so sure I want to leave it up to every single consumner to take care of their own business. Should they, and should they be responsible consumers and borrowers? Of course. But that is not the question. The question is will they? Most likely many will not. And if not then in the end who pays the price by way of higher prices, restrictive lending and the potential for another similar economic crises in the future? We all do. One can hope that people be more responsible. One can even demand that they be more responsible. But that does not preclude that they will be more responsible. I for one would prefer a Consumer Protrection Agency in addition to stiffer regualtions for lending institutrions so that you and I are not caught in the middle between irresponsible lenders and irresponsible borrowers. Such protections are not necessarily for the protection of those who act irresponsibly but for the protection of those who do act responsibly, and who should not be required in the end to suffer the consequences of those relationships between gluttonous lenders and gluttonous irresponsible borrowers. Instead of putting everyone out on a limb to take care of themselves why not establish rules, regulations and an enforcement arm for the same to prevent these problems up front. Why not be pro-active rather than reactive.
Heres a gem from Boner
Ensuring there's enough money to pay for the war will require reforming the country's entitlement system, Boehner said. He said he'd favor increasing the Social Security retirement age to 70 for people who have at least 20 years until retirement, tying cost-of-living increases to the consumer price index rather than wage inflation and limiting payments to those who need them.
Ever notice that the GOBP always go after the middle class?
jomama,
What middle class. We are becoming extinct.
I love it when Republicans write the Democrats' campaign commercials for them.
Okay, the administration overreacted to the oil spill in the Gulf. Fair enough. So do you now stop criticizing them for not doing enough, if you claim they overreacted by placing the 6 month moratorium? Honestly, most Americans kind of see things the opposite way - we don't think anyone involved is really doing enough to combat the greatest environmental disaster in over a decade.
I had the same thought Chris, are they overeacting, or not doing enough? Do Republicans in Gulf states want the government to leave them alone or take over? If BP has taken responsibility for the spill why do we need the Feds to do anything?
The Feds honestly can't do much regarding the spill itself. What they can do, and should do, is make sure they have some regulatory structure in place to prevent this from happenning again. This wasn't just an accident, it was reckless disregard. Couple that with the information that's come to light about the last decade's coziness between the regulatory agency and Big Oil...yeesh.
Touche, Costmart.
Nicely put, Chris.
Gang of seven on the poster behind him... now down to gangster of one
nuff said.
God help us if the obstructionists do take over the House.
Be careful what you wish for First Read.
Crybaby John as Speaker? Heaven forbid. Imagine the obstructionists in control? You think nothing has gotten done, if those jokers are ever in charge they might as well close down Congress as it would be a waste of time and money. That may be what they are after. Since some seem to be Fascist wannabes that would pave the way for their Führer.
His record speaks for itself, he is not for this country but for his own wealth. If this comes to be true, he will complete his destruction of this country. He has stood for nothing but obstruction, but what did he do while the Republicans were on a drunken spending spree? nothing! So what will happen again, nothing but more obstruction and the total decline of the average American citizen!
I remember what it was like with Bill Frist and Newt Gingrich in charge. That and worse are what I see if Bohner and McConnell ( I assume he would be Senat Majority Leader) gain control of their respective chambers. It brings an empty feeling to the pit of my stomach like I haven't had in years. I feel we must do whatever we can to ensure they do not take back control. In our county, we are starting to reach out to voters that are becoming eligible to vote for the first time this year and at least educating them to what exactly is going on. Hpefully we can have an impact, at least in our state. Mitch Mc Connell has got to go.
We're fuked...