A little sympathy for Boehner? OK, but just a little

You have to feel a least a little sorry for John Boehner.

In fact, I wouldn’t blame the speaker of the House for wondering what terrible thing he did in some previous life to deserve being handed this budget mess. He finds himself under siege not just by his opponents, which is to be expected, but by his supposed friends as well.

And despite what some of those “friends” would like to believe, this is a battle that Boehner cannot fight and win, and he knows it. The issues at stake in the budget standoff are essentially the same issues fought out during the presidential campaign, and as speaker, Boehner has neither the pulpit nor the firepower to win against Obama where Mitt Romney failed.

That was confirmed by a new poll released Tuesday in which just 27 percent of Americans said they would blame President Obama if budget negotiations fail and the country is forced off the so-called fiscal cliff. Almost twice as many — 53 percent — would blame congressional Republicans. And yes, while Boehner deserves some of the blame for that situation, it is shared by the entire Republican Party. For years, they have celebrated themselves as unbending and uncompromising, making stubborn intransigence a point of party pride.

So they have no right to be dismayed that that’s how the American public has come to see them.

In a belated effort to try to dispel that image, Boehner proposed a budget package Monday that included $800 billion in increased taxes, a step that he and his fellow Republicans had long insisted they would never take. If you overlook the fact that the math doesn’t work — it is impossible to raise the $800 billion in promised revenue through the tax changes offered by Boehner — the proposal does represents a welcome step toward reality.

And for taking that step, Boehner has of course been hammered by those who are supposedly on his side. Sen. Jim DeMint, a South Carolina Republican, said that “Speaker Boehner’s $800 billion tax hike will destroy American jobs and allow politicians in Washington to spend even more, while not reducing our $16 trillion debt by a single penny.” The conservative Heritage Foundation followed suit, calling the Boehner plan “little more than categorical, pre-emptive capitulation.”

And of course, the proposal that conservatives saw as “capitulation” was rejected by Obama as far short of what will be needed in a final deal. The president noted that he ran for re-election on a promise to end the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest of Americans, and he repeated his insistence that it be included as part of any final package.

Clearly, after years of GOP obstruction, Obama isn’t in the mood to let Boehner off lightly.

In his package, Boehner did make at least two proposals that ought to be seriously considered:

— The speaker advocated a slight change in how future cost-of-living adjustments are made to Social Security benefits, a reform that would affect mainly Social Security recipients who have other sources of income. It’s a change that Obama tentatively agreed to more than a year ago, before negotiations failed. Including it in the final deal would give Boehner political cover as an entitlement reform and would also be good fiscal policy.

— Boehner also proposed saving money by delaying Medicare eligibility from age 65 to age 67. It’s a popular proposal among Republicans, who justify it by pointing out that people are now living longer. However, that isn’t true across the board. Among upper-income, presumably white-collar Americans, the average lifespan of a 60-year-old male has indeed increased by more than six years since 1972. But among lower-income males, it increased by only two years. For those in more physically demanding, lower-income jobs, delaying Medicare coverage would be a real hardship.

Given that increasing lifespan differential, however, it would be perfectly reasonable to charge wealthier Americans slightly higher monthly Medicare premiums, as Boehner proposes. Because that would be scored as an entitlement cut, it would also help Boehner fend off those in his own party who are going to be very unhappy with the deal that is eventually reached.

That too is something Obama has to keep in mind.

– Jay Bookman

433 comments Add your comment

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

December 5th, 2012
10:30 am

“And despite what some of those “friends” would like to believe, this is a battle that Boehner cannot fight and win, and he knows it. The issues at stake in the budget standoff are essentially the same issues fought out during the presidential campaign, and as speaker, Boehner has neither the pulpit nor the firepower to win against Obama where Mitt Romney failed”

tooooooooooooooo baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad.

(and that is the extent of my compassion for Boehner)

Keep Up the Good Fight!

December 5th, 2012
10:31 am

The battle to stop the GOP mindless must still continue

stands for decibels

December 5th, 2012
10:31 am

The Speaker?

If you meet him, have some courtesy.

Have some sympathy, and some taste.

stands for decibels

December 5th, 2012
10:34 am

Boehner has of course been hammered by those who are supposedly on his side.

anyone actually believe this wasn’t all scripted in advance? “Ok, I’ll propose these piddling loophole changes that supposedly raise revenue, and you’ll call me a RINO on 3…2…1…”

Brosephus™

December 5th, 2012
10:37 am

A little sympathy for Boehner? OK, but just a little

Bull… If he wants sympathy, he can look in the dictionary between sh*t and syphillis.

He ran for office, and he ran for his current leadership position. Whatever happened to personal responsibility? If he’s just now realizing that his position actually required him to think and govern for all of America, then he should step down if he can’t perform his job. I don’t feel anything for him. I bet he expects me to do my job, regardless of the situation. Likewise, I expect him to do his job.

stands for decibels

December 5th, 2012
10:38 am

— Boehner also proposed saving money by delaying Medicare eligibility from age 65 to age 67. It’s a popular proposal among Republicans, who justify it by pointing out that people are now living longer because they always favor screwing modestly incomed Americans over taxing wealthy ones.

FYT.

By the way, that ^^ single “proposal” to raise Medicare eligibility might be the single most politically stupid thing the GOPers will do in 2012. And it has a LOT of competition.

John Boehner’s Holiday Party Snub

December 5th, 2012
10:39 am

As party fouls go, John Boehner’s declining to get his photo taken with President Obama at the White House Christmas soiree is pretty innocuous. It’s not like the Speaker lit up in the Blue Room, or started snacking on the traditional gingerbread White House, or tied one on and began crooning Clarence Carter’s “Backdoor Santa” to FLOTUS. (Although, how fantastic would that have been?)
Nonetheless, Boehner’s photographic demurral—like his ongoing refusal to attend State dinners—stands as yet one more example of the lack of civility and general pettiness that now reign inside the Beltway.
Of course, it also stands as proof that the speaker is no idiot and that he knows all too well that, should a merry grip-and-grin of him and Obama somehow make its way into the public eye during these oh-so-tense fiscal-cliff negotiations, the GOP’s right flank would be all over his perma-tanned hide like a duck on a june bug.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/05/john-boehner-s-holiday-party-snub.html

Look before I leap...

December 5th, 2012
10:40 am

It’s how negotiations and compromise are supposed to work.

2 sides put forward proposals.
Find the common ground and chip away at the rest.

The Dems will have to cave on some things and Boehner will have to corral the Norquistians.

I am going to send the man a carton of Luckie Strikes – he is gonna need them.

Fred ™

December 5th, 2012
10:41 am

dB: Nice catch lol. They played the worst cover of that tune I have ever heard on Sons of Anarchy last night. (They say Janes addiction, but I’m not sure).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt0ipUCfdlU

DannyX

December 5th, 2012
10:41 am

Poor Boehner, you know he has had to have had at least 40-50 good cries over this.

bookman parrot

December 5th, 2012
10:49 am

yo Brosephus™
December 5th, 2012
10:37 am

Take a sedative dude! It is your beloved Bookman that said give a little sympathy (probably in jest) and not Boehner asking for it.
I do love your statement about personal responsibility. That is a hoot. A large portion of the voters for BHO, have no clue about that concept and voted for gov’t to take care of them….

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

December 5th, 2012
10:50 am

Poor Old John.

STUPID LIBERAL

December 5th, 2012
10:50 am

Obama wants to go over the cliff, I read the article on yahoo. The liberals never lie.

stands for decibels

December 5th, 2012
10:50 am

They played the worst cover of that tune I have ever heard on Sons of Anarchy last night.

I’ll have to take your word for it.

Unless you’re just learning how to put chords and solos together in your first-ever band, I think that’s one of those tunes nobody should be permitted to cover.

stands for decibels

December 5th, 2012
10:51 am

A large portion of the voters for BHO, have no clue about that concept

not intended to be a factual statement.

Fred ™

December 5th, 2012
10:52 am

bookman parrot

December 5th, 2012
10:49 am

yo Brosephus™
December 5th, 2012
10:37 am

Take a sedative dude! It is your beloved Bookman that said give a little sympathy (probably in jest) and not Boehner asking for it.
I do love your statement about personal responsibility. That is a hoot. A large portion of the voters for BHO, have no clue about that concept and voted for gov’t to take care of them….
+++++++++++++++++++

Poor parrot. His FOXBOT lies were rejected by the AMerican voters yet after years of Rush, Neal, and FOX it’s all he knows so he has to repeat the same tired old lies, over and over again. It must be sad being him…….. Everyday is Groundhog day……… despite his hate and rage, six o’clock comes every day for him……..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt4JXKUv5MQ

STUPID LIBERAL

December 5th, 2012
10:52 am

where do I sign up for my Obama check ?

Fred ™

December 5th, 2012
10:54 am

STUPID LIBERAL

December 5th, 2012
10:52 am

where do I sign up for my Obama check ?
+++++++++++++++++++++

Here:

http://www.indeed.com/q-Structural-Engineer-jobs.html

STUPID LIBERAL

December 5th, 2012
10:55 am

lol that is too funny Fred lol

Joe Hussein Mama

December 5th, 2012
10:55 am

Brosephus — “Bull… If he wants sympathy, he can look in the dictionary between sh*t and syphillis.”

Agreed. Let him eat some of the pewp sandwich he’s been serving to the President the last couple of years.

Republicans, you’re about to get rolled again, just like you did on Election Day. And the beauty part is that most of y’all have no idea whatsoever that it’s about to happen. Better try to cobble together a deal the President will go for, or else you can eat all that nice, delicious scorn the majority of the electorate has saved up for you.

Meet the President instead of insisting he meet you — or else watch your support dwindle even further.

stands for decibels

December 5th, 2012
10:55 am

Speaking of the Speaker–I gotta say, I think this beloved ‘toon from two years back, now seems rather quaint.

And that is a very good thing.

STUPID LIBERAL

December 5th, 2012
10:55 am

Fred,

Not a single listing in the Atlanta area.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

December 5th, 2012
10:57 am

“stands as yet one more example of the lack of civility and general pettiness”

yep.

sounds like the new-style GOP to me.

Erwin's cat

December 5th, 2012
10:57 am

I think the orchestrated plan all along is/was to go over the cliff and then blame the other side

getalife

December 5th, 2012
10:58 am

The crybaby handed out the checks on the house floor stupid.

Brosephus™

December 5th, 2012
10:59 am

Take a sedative dude! It is your beloved Bookman that said give a little sympathy (probably in jest) and not Boehner asking for it.

Why should I take a sedative? If you don’t like what I said, then skip over it. That doesn’t change the fact that Boehner made the explicit decisions that put him in the position that he’s in. As a taxpayer, I simply ask that he perform the job that I’m paying him to perform. If he can’t do it, then step down and let someone else do the job.

I do love your statement about personal responsibility. That is a hoot. A large portion of the voters for BHO, have no clue about that concept and voted for gov’t to take care of them….

You know, GlaxoSmithKlein is doing clinicals on this new drug called Bhofloxin. They claim it treats Obama Derangement Syndrome. You should sign up to be part of the clinical. Maybe that will help with your ODS as nobody has said a friggin’ thing about what you’re ranting about. Why don’t you grow up and talk like an adult. You know, do the whole personal responsibility thing instead of blaming your issues on everybody else but you.

Shar

December 5th, 2012
10:59 am

@decibels, I couldn’t have quoted better.

I do have some sympathy for Boehner, although it’s limited. His party went chasing after the Tea Partiers with ramped up rhetoric, Last Stand metaphors and finger-pointing accusations of political and moral turpitude, and now he’s stuck with crazy people clustering around him demanding the impossible and the rest of the populace turning their backs.

I think Boehner showed his natural ability to think and compromise when he put together his deal with Obama, but after being shelled by his howling masses he backed himself into Intransigence Corner and there is no way out.

Now there’s talk that the DOA proposal Boehner delivered has the potential to split the Republican caucus, which would be a very good thing. Marginalizing the lunatic fringe would give the traditional fiscal conservatives room to manoeuvre and bring a sensible perspective to the negotiations with Obama. Boehner may not survive it, but that’s what you get when you move next door to the Asylum and you leave your house wide open with hot cookies on the table.

getalife

December 5th, 2012
11:00 am

This crisis was invented by the gop so I have no pity for self inflicted bs.

East Cobb RINO, Inc (LLC)

December 5th, 2012
11:00 am

I suspect the closer this gets, there will be more signatures to get the bill to extend tax cuts for all but those making > 250K out of committee and force a vote on it. If all the dems sign on and enough of the lame duck GOP congressmen join in, there will be enough to force the vote.

deegee

December 5th, 2012
11:03 am

John Boehner has been in Washington since 1991. He has had 21 years to figure this out. From 1995 to 1999 he served as House Republican Conference Chairman. He served as the House Minority Leader from 2007 until 2011, and House Majority Leader from 2006 until 2007. On November 17, 2010, Boehner was unanimously chosen by the House Republicans as their nominee for Speaker. What is his problem? He has plenty of friends. Why can’t he use his political popularity to get a deal on the fiscal cliff?

oops

December 5th, 2012
11:03 am

being a white collar desk jockey is still hazardous to your health

spending billions to protect everyone under the perhaps false assumption that a minority few need extra protection is fiscally stupid

oops

December 5th, 2012
11:06 am

got your parachute yet?

Granny Godzilla - Union Thugette

December 5th, 2012
11:06 am

Anybody heard what the status is of Leader Pelosi’s
discharge petition?

one and only

December 5th, 2012
11:07 am

hey scott, read joannie and jims facebook, good column and needed for our education system

stands for decibels

December 5th, 2012
11:08 am

Pelosi’s discharge petition?

that can’t possibly be as nasty as it sounds.

Mick

December 5th, 2012
11:09 am

Speaker of the house, not the republican house, the whole house; Is the boehner the best man for this job? Republicans are garnering more disrespect as a party, daily…

Logical Dude

December 5th, 2012
11:10 am

Mr Boehner: advocated a slight change in how future cost-of-living adjustments are made to Social Security benefits,. . .
proposed saving money by delaying Medicare eligibility from age 65 to age 67″

Finally. Two huge entitlement changes that are needed.
Jay: “it would be perfectly reasonable to charge wealthier Americans slightly higher monthly Medicare premiums”
Exactly.
People will have reductions in benefits, and people will have to pay more. It’s all part of the journey to fiscal responsibility.

Now, once we are on our way out of debt, then we can adjust taxes again, since we won’t have to pay all those interest payments, but until then, we have to pay what we owe.

Now, where are all those defense cuts that we are all looking for?

CJ

December 5th, 2012
11:12 am

The speaker advocated a slight change in how future cost-of-living adjustments are made to Social Security benefits, a reform that would affect mainly Social Security recipients who have other sources of income. It’s a change that Obama tentatively agreed to more than a year ago, before negotiations failed. Including it in the final deal would give Boehner political cover as an entitlement reform and would also be good fiscal policy.

Is Jay talking about going to a chained CPI? If so, then Bernie Sanders lays out the effects on his site:

“Under the chained CPI, the average senior who retires at age 65 would see their Social Security benefits cut by about $560 a year when they reach 75 and by about $1,000 a year once they turn 85. At the beginning of 2012, the average Social Security benefit for a retired worker was $14,760 per year.

The chained CPI would also substantially cut the VA benefits of more than 3 million veterans. The largest cuts would impact young, permanently disabled veterans who were seriously wounded in combat. According to the Social Security Administration, the chained CPI would mean that permanently disabled veterans who started receiving VA disability benefits at age 30 would see their benefits cut by more than $1,300 a year at age 45; $1,800 a year at age 55; and $2,260 a year at age 65.”

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=87B3DFB8-4195-4577-A7C8-5ED4E69251E2

Social Security is not in crisis and not contributing to our deficits. Nevertheless, if we want to dramatically extend the life the trust fund, then we could simply convert the Social Security tax from a regressive tax to a flat tax by eliminating the payroll caps. No benefit cuts, and the non-crisis is solved.

Elections Have Consequences

December 5th, 2012
11:12 am

The poll numbers speak volumes. Obama will continue to push for higher taxes, and no real spending reform, because he can. The media will, of course, willingly comply.

I wouldn’t feel sorry for Boehner, but for the country as a whole. We’re all paying the price for the current lack of leadership, starting with Obama.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

December 5th, 2012
11:12 am

I’d like to see some analysis of the GOP’s “CPI reform” – what does it mean? are they reforming the basket of goods? are they reforming how CPI/COLA is applied?

[...] RatesTIMEGOP: Obama once backed our loophole planUSA TODAYMr. Boehner: Be Not AfraidHuffington PostAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -NBCNews.com -Businessweekall 5,990 news articles » This entry was [...]

East Cobb RINO, Inc (LLC)

December 5th, 2012
11:12 am

Pelosi’s discharge petition is what I was referring to in my previous post. I think I heard on NPR news they had over a hundred either yesterday or the day before. Well short of what is needed but I expect more to get on board as the deadline gets closer.

Jackie

December 5th, 2012
11:13 am

Rep. Boehner (R-OH) was elected speaker of the house by the Republican majority; he is the legislative leader of the elected majority.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

December 5th, 2012
11:13 am

CJ – 11:12 – thanks for that – it’s the first explanation I’ve seen

Logical Dude

December 5th, 2012
11:13 am

Plus, one more item:

For Medicare, for younger people looking for that retirement age changing. . . it probably won’t matter at all. Federal medical care will evolve into Medicare for all (or whatever name it will be used in 20-30 years). We will have cradle to grave medical care like (almost?) all of the other modern industrial nations. Once we, as a nation make living more important than killing (by reducing “defense” spending, and creating “health” spending), then we will be on our way to more prosperity again.
/driveby

Corbin Sharpe. Baby Boomer leech...and earned it!

December 5th, 2012
11:14 am

Fiscal clif, scmishcal piff…there ain’t gonna be no going over the fiscal cliff. Don’t you know the world is going to end on the 21st? :”lol:

stands for decibels

December 5th, 2012
11:14 am

it would be perfectly reasonable to charge wealthier Americans slightly higher monthly Medicare premiums, as Boehner proposes.

expanded means-testing of Medicare benefits nets you next to nothing, short term, and like the payroll tax deduction, will means long-term unpleasantness (and that is putting it mildly.)

Do not want.

MANGLER

December 5th, 2012
11:14 am

I haven’t heard anyone on any side mention this:
If spending cuts will cause another recession, then the Government is too large a part of the overall economy in the first place.
So let the cuts happen, the economy will shrink a little, and then the gaps will be slowly but surely filled in by the private sector. Look, the Government has been shedding jobs by the hundreds of thousands for 4 years now. They’ve just been doing that slowly so as not to shake things up too much too quick. It’s the same reason banks have been shedding foreclosed properties slowly, so as not to totally derail everything all at once. We may be at a point where a sudden jolt less Government spending (and fewer Government jobs) won’t sink the ship, just make it lilt a little.

St Simons - aboriginal BOOTAKOOK 2014

December 5th, 2012
11:16 am

lock the door, Barack. Don’t come out til Jan 2nd.

i wish us libs could grow a killer instinct
di-di-didi-di
we have the technology
the bionic liberal

Thomas heyward Jr

December 5th, 2012
11:16 am

Admit it………..for the country’s sake.
Those who espouse freedom, personal liberty, a limited government, AND the rule of law…………but STILL would vote for the Republican party ran by the likes of Boehnor, McConnel, Cantor, Chambliss, Issackson ad naseum……..are really only frightened folks who are ONLY smart enough to be aware of shame therefore they will never admit to being democrats.
.
But democrats they are.
aka immoral ….control freak…aggressive violent……statist parasites.
.
Acknowledgement of your problem is the first step.
.
Napolitano/Block 2016.

CJ

December 5th, 2012
11:18 am

Given that increasing lifespan differential, however, it would be perfectly reasonable to charge wealthier Americans slightly higher monthly Medicare premiums, as Boehner proposes.

This proposal is also entirely unnecessary. We could save $200 or $300 hundred billion more if we would simply allow Medicare to bargain for prescription drug prices. But the party whose mission is to “enrich the rich” would prefer to cut benefits (or raise premiums) on seniors than do anything that would frustrate their corporate base.

Fly-On-The-Wall

December 5th, 2012
11:19 am

The Speaker is backed into a corner. Nothing he does will make anyone happy and it seems that regardless of what he does the Republican Party will look like the loser in this contest. He should grow a pair and do what is right for this nation – Country First not the Party. Pass the President’s plan now!

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

December 5th, 2012
11:19 am

“If spending cuts will cause another recession, then the Government is too large a part of the overall economy in the first place.”

(sigh)

you just don’t get it, do you.

1) Let’s say that you’re laying off 100 people. That’s 100 more people in the workforce – when corporations aren’t hiring to begin with. It’s not that government is too big, you’re just adding more rain to the ground that’s already saturated.
2) Government buys stuff, too – everything from paper to ink to software licensing to post-its. They cut back, suppliers feel it.
3) When programs for the poor are cut, that’s the biggest impact on consumer spending – why? because they have a higher marginal propensity to spend than the rich do.

East Cobb RINO, Inc (LLC)

December 5th, 2012
11:19 am

Here is what I could find on the discharge petition:

http://clerk.house.gov/112/lrc/pd/petitions/DisPet0006.xml

If all house dems sign they only need 25 repugs to break ranks.

Thulsa Doom

December 5th, 2012
11:20 am

Its always the republicans fault. That theme is like a broken record on this blog. What boehner should do is just go along completely with whatever Obama wants. Then when the economy collapses precisely because Obama got everything he wanted then perhaps a modicum of reality will hit the libs and they will reach the obvious conclusion that his policies just don’t work. Then again they would probably go orweillian when obamas policies fail and blame the republicans for going along with obamas policies to begin with. Such is life in kook world on the Bookman blog.

TaxPayer

December 5th, 2012
11:20 am

Republicans made their mark all right and I think it only fitting that Obama insist that they clean up their own stains. Nothing like a little elbow grease to get the job done.

jconservative

December 5th, 2012
11:21 am

Everyone relax!

Taxes on 100% of taxpayers are going to go up on 1/1/2013. No member of the House or Senate has to vote on anything. It is a done deal.

And also on that day spending is going to be cut by $2 trillion over the next 10 years. No member of the House or Senate has to vote on anything. It is a done deal.

No member of Congress has to “cave in” to the other side or break any pledges and look bad to the folks back home.

And the beauty of the deal is that it was done in bi-partisan votes in both the House and Senate over a 9 month period.

St Simons - aboriginal BOOTAKOOK 2014

December 5th, 2012
11:21 am

“Don’t you know the world is going to end on the 21st? :”lol:”

kinda, ‘Corb’ buddy. And, the world is BEGINNING on the 21st too.

STUPID LIBERAL

December 5th, 2012
11:23 am

What are you going to do with your smaller paychecks beginning Jan. 1st ?

TaxPayer

December 5th, 2012
11:24 am

I’m sure Republicans have their own polls showing that things are not as bad for them as reality dictates. :lol:

N-GA (on the winning side 2 federal elections in a row!)

December 5th, 2012
11:24 am

There are those who cannot wait to rub Boehner’s nose in his mess……

Wait a minute

December 5th, 2012
11:24 am

Master Bookman,
There’s no need to mince words, the current and the preceding Speaker of the House are two of the worst, if not two worst, of the 20th-21st centuries. No need to defend them :)

Both Mister Speaker and Mister President (shucks, we went through an entire presidential election without the topic seriously being discussed) are gnawing at the outer, outer edges of a massive problem. Neither of them deserved re-election based on their stunningly poor records and complete lack of leadership. Chimps with abacuses have shown more mathematical prowess than these two.

CJ

December 5th, 2012
11:25 am

We need jobs jconservative. Millions are still out of work, and raising taxes on consumers (the poor and middle class) and cutting spending while the private sector is still on soft ground is likely to lead a double-dip recession. Hence the “fiscal cliff”–Bernanke’s term.

Actually, the best way to reduce the deficit is the same way that Clinton did so, and Obama has done so over the last four years (yes, he inherited a $1.4 trillion deficit)…grow the economy by putting Americans back to work.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

December 5th, 2012
11:25 am

“What boehner should do is just go along completely with whatever Obama wants.”

well, that would be nice … but in lieu of that, he should at the very least do what the people want.

East Cobb RINO, Inc (LLC)

December 5th, 2012
11:26 am

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections,_2012#Republicans , there are enough lame duck repugs who do not have to fear party retribution and could sign on to the discharge petition.

Thulsa Doom

December 5th, 2012
11:31 am

Going over the fiscal cliff? just remember libs. You voted for it.

alex

December 5th, 2012
11:31 am

Repubs will nedd to make concession on top wage earners, as for the entitlement cuts, need more as Krugman has said. ACA will cover those with difficulty in transition to higher age cut-off for medicare. Aside from all the BS by many on this blog the soon to be tax increase for ALL if no agreement is made will be a COLD shower.” Yep, it’s the Reupbs fault”–yep but the MIDDLE class is still paying more taxes—”but it’s not my fault”, everybody needs to wake up and work toward an agreement or the W in the economic recession world will be in play….Cute comebacks won’t work….

Brosephus™

December 5th, 2012
11:32 am

If spending cuts will cause another recession, then the Government is too large a part of the overall economy in the first place.
So let the cuts happen, the economy will shrink a little, and then the gaps will be slowly but surely filled in by the private sector.

I guess you don’t realize that the government has basically been the consumer of last resort for the last 4 years. That last part about the gaps being filled in by the private sector is nothing more than wishful dreaming. If that were the case, the private sector could have began filling in the gaps in March 2009 instead of holding on to everything as though the world will end in 2 weeks.

The best possible outcome for us would have been if our elected officials has prioritized jobs/careers more than they prioritized dysfunction. More people working and earning decent wages means less people depending on government for welfare. That also means more revenues coming to the government in taxes to cover everything from Medicaid, Social Security, and defense spending. Instead, we have a ruling class that’s concerned with wealth hoarding and have bought and paid for the best government they could that would help them hoard their wealth.

Whatever

December 5th, 2012
11:33 am

Listen to yourselves. You want your elected leaders to work together to find good solutions but you come on here and talk to each other like trash. You talk about your elected leaders like trash. It will never work.

We need to pull together and find some common ground. A great way to do that is start with yourself. We’ll never solve these issues if we can’t work and live together.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

December 5th, 2012
11:33 am

“Going over the fiscal cliff? just remember libs. You voted for it.”

oh, get off it, bitter boy.

we voted to INCREASE REVENUES as well as cut spending – we’ve met halfway. If Boehner wants to be a bonehead, then it’s on your side of the aisle.

TaxPayer

December 5th, 2012
11:33 am

Where are all the Tea Party twits these days.

Dawg Man

December 5th, 2012
11:34 am

Liberals, especially this columnist & his blind followers, are so sad when it comes to their partisanship. (BTW—I’m not going to lie to you and say that this is a “little sympathy” because it is not.)

Whatever

December 5th, 2012
11:35 am

USink,

Should our elected leaders always “do what the people want.”? I don’t think that’s a recipe for leadership. Just think back in time at all the bad things that were “what the people wanted.”

No, we need leaders who will make the best decisions apart from politics.

DannyX

December 5th, 2012
11:37 am

“No, we need leaders who will make the best decisions apart from politics.”

Now that’s cute.

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

December 5th, 2012
11:38 am

“Should our elected leaders always “do what the people want.”?”

Hrm. So, I wonder why they’re called Representatives … hrmmmmmmm

Whatever

December 5th, 2012
11:38 am

DannyX,

It may be cute but is it wrong?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

December 5th, 2012
11:39 am

Ahh, the stupidity of the “you always blame Republicans” false meme followed by the blame the Dems meme. :roll:

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

December 5th, 2012
11:40 am

“It may be cute but is it wrong?”

hopelessly naive is what it is.

Whatever

December 5th, 2012
11:40 am

USink,

They represent the people but that doesn’t mean they do everything the people want. What if the people really want the government to give them money without having to work. Should they do that?

St Simons - aboriginal BOOTAKOOK 2014

December 5th, 2012
11:40 am

“Tea Potty II is gonna DWARF Tea Potty I”

- Grover & Rush Jefferson, titular heads of the Republican Pahhty

Elections Have Consequences

December 5th, 2012
11:40 am

Can someone outline these so-called ’spending cuts’ please? Without including costs savings from eliminating military action or the Medicare cuts to fund the ACA.

Whatever

December 5th, 2012
11:40 am

USink,

I’ll keep fighting for naivety while the current system keeps putting us down the tubes.

Jefferson

December 5th, 2012
11:41 am

Doom if you speak like a politician, you will be thought of like one.

stands for decibels

December 5th, 2012
11:41 am

According to the Social Security Administration, the chained CPI would mean that permanently disabled veterans who started receiving VA disability benefits at age 30 would see their benefits cut by more than $1,300 a year at age 45; $1,800 a year at age 55; and $2,260 a year at age 65.”

But the skimmer-class feels uncertain and unloved, so we need to screw those moochers. Apparently.

oops

December 5th, 2012
11:41 am

everything is going to be fine

stop worrying

we have obamacare to take care of us

oops

December 5th, 2012
11:42 am

“we voted to INCREASE REVENUES as well as cut spending – we’ve met halfway.”

four pinocchios

Brosephus™

December 5th, 2012
11:44 am

It may be cute but is it wrong?

In our current hyperpartisaned, instant gratification seeking society, it’s wishful thinking.

East Cobb RINO, Inc (LLC)

December 5th, 2012
11:45 am

We will never make it to the edge of the cliff considering the world will end in 15 days. But if the Mayan calendar is wrong, then I will start my Christmas shopping.

Whatever

December 5th, 2012
11:45 am

Bro,

It may be but that’s why we need to fight for it. We are screwed if we keep up this partisan bickering on the budget.

Doggone/GA

December 5th, 2012
11:45 am

“So, I wonder why they’re called Representatives ”

Because the “represent” the voters, they don’t neccessarily parrot them. But of course, to even do what the “voters want” you have to have some idea of WHAT they want. And, like it or not voters, some of you are going to get NO for an answer.

Jack ®

December 5th, 2012
11:48 am

I’m gonna try to do away with this cliff thing. I’m gonna try to do away with the sort of angst that Bookman and his cadre suffer…I’m talking about this inequity thing. Been thinking about opening a shoe store. I realize it won’t be my store; it’ll be a government store. But anyway. When the store is opened, I’ll hire some unemployed folks that have absolutely no shoe store experience. My equipment and beginning inventory will be purchased with a government loan that I never intend to repay. When it appears that I’m making too much money, I’ll raise the pay of the shoe clerks; I’ll pay for their insurance, their cell phones, their lunches, their contraceptives, give ‘em some gas money. All that stuff. Maybe throw in some rent money. Why not? I won’t have to worry because the government will be monitoring my bank account and when the cash gets low, the’ll send some more money. The only thing that worries me is, again, that I may be making too much money, so I’ll just cut the shoe prices in half and that’ll drive my competitors crazy. I might open ten stores and run ‘em as a proprietor; don’t want to upset anybody being one of those old ugly corporations, y’know.

jconservative

December 5th, 2012
11:48 am

“We need jobs jconservative. Millions are still out of work, and raising taxes on consumers (the poor and middle class) and cutting spending while the private sector is still on soft ground is likely to lead a double-dip recession.”

“Going over the fiscal cliff? just remember libs. You voted for it.”

Please. Let’s give proper credit to those who deserve it. The Tax Increases scheduled for 1/1/2013 were voted into law in the House by 139 Democrats and 138 Republicans. In the Senate it was 43 Democrats and 37 Republicans voting to raise taxes on 1/1/2013. So both parties get equal amount of glory.

The spending cuts going into effect 1/1/2013 were also the result of a bi-partisan vote. The Budget Control Act of 2011 passed the with 174 Republican Yeas and 95 Democratic Yeas. In the Senate it was 45 Democrats and 28 Republicans voting Yea.

So let’s be sure we give both parties their deserved credit for the coming additional revenue and reduced spending.

Matti

December 5th, 2012
11:48 am

stands for decibels @ 10:31,

:D

DannyX

December 5th, 2012
11:49 am

Average Republican on fiscal cliff…

Question: Why aren’t Americans blaming Obama for the failed fiscal cliff talks.

Republican voter: I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, uh, some people out there in our nation don’t have jobs and, uh, I believe that our job creators like such as in Greece and, uh, the Europe, everywhere like such as, and, I believe that they should, our jobs over HERE in the U.S. should help the U.S., uh, or, uh, should be like Greece and shouldn’t help the Greekian and the European countries, so we will be able to build up our future, for our children and such as the taxes be cut and Obama phones.

alex

December 5th, 2012
11:50 am

Us in UK, please provide specfics of spending cuts that were voted for, thanks.

TaxPayer

December 5th, 2012
11:50 am

And, like it or not voters, some of you are going to get NO for an answer.

And probably nowhere close to 47% of them.

oops

December 5th, 2012
11:50 am

tom gambeski

December 5th, 2012
11:51 am

Bookman,along with most liberals,understands how this country has become the richest most powerful country in history they just can’t face the fact that government had nothing to do with this amazing success.
Crony capitalists like Warren Buffet will pay fractionally more then the 10 percent he now pays if Obama succeeds in raising tax rates on the rich.
Buffets income is derived from his taking advantage of our antiquated “progressive tax code” which enables the rich toderive their income from low dividend and capital gains paying stocks.
Eliminating those rates for cronies like Warren Buffet would deprive Obama of the funds and support he receives from them.
Obama’s premise that raising tax rates on 2 % of the population will reduce our deficits in any meaningful way is a smoke screen that covers his quest for near dictatorial control of our government.
Unfortunately there’s never a shortage of “useful idiots” who are willing to blindly support such an obvious pursuit of power and control by a President, and that is so obviously ignored by the main stream press,is it ignorance,fanaticism,ideology or just plane stupid?

USinUK - not very ladylike (and former Girl Scout)

December 5th, 2012
11:51 am

“They represent the people but that doesn’t mean they do everything the people want. What if the people really want the government to give them money without having to work. Should they do that?”

what if the people want a pony?

how about let’s stick with the real world, shall we??

you vote for people who (theoretically) agree with your pov – therefore, (as long as what they are proposing is constitutional), they should listen to the people who put them into office.

in this case – the people have spoken – they want tax increases as well as spending cuts. Boehner will ignore that desire at his peril.

Alan Sprague

December 5th, 2012
11:51 am

No sympathy for someone who doe’s not respect our President!!!