Tea Party Activists Revolt Against (Lord) Boehner ...

[Janice]

Tea Party Activists Revolt Against Boehner Amid Debt Crisis

As House Speaker John Boehner frantically pieces together a plan to rescue the nation from financial disaster next week, members of the Tea Party movement who helped propel Republicans back into power last fall are calling for his head.

“Boehner must go,” Tea Party Nation founder Judson Phillips said in his blog on Wednesday, calling the speaker a “big government Republican” who “worships at the altar of massive spending.”

“We need a speaker who is a leader. We need someone with courage and vision. Boehner has none of those qualities. He is not a leader,” Phillips wrote. “John Boehner simply wishes to be the manager in chief of the welfare state. His vision of the GOP and the speakership involves golfing, drinking and not rocking the boat.” >>>

Tea Party activists, who clamor for lower taxes and smaller government, are up in arms over a Boehner plan that would slash $1 trillion in federal spending and increase the nation’s $14.3 trillion legal limit on borrowing money.

Boehner revised his plan after congressional budget analysts said it would save $850 billion over the next decade instead of the $1.2 trillion advertised. The latest figures put the savings above $900 billion, more than the bill's proposed debt limit increase. The House is expected to vote on the revised plan Thursday.

$1.2 trillion over 10 years? Boehner re-worked his plan to save 22 billion this year. That's about 1/16 of one percent decrease in this year's deficit. He's joking right?? We already passed a bill through the House and sent it to the Senate. Its called Cut, Cap and Balance. Tell them to take it or go fish. Vote it up or down. Then give us the changes you want on paper in a way that meets the same requirements. Stop "compromising" with your self Mr Speaker and grow a spine dammit!

Let's see a proposal that cuts spending NOW, not over some fictitious number of years. We've been letting the crooks of both parties play this game of three card monty for over 20 years. We are sick of politicians from both parties who live with their hands in our pockets and excuses on their lips. Otherwise what is a debt ceiling and why is it even there?

And now McCain has the nerve to attack us? Go to hell McCain and take the establishment elites with you!

[Janice]

Sean Hannity Takes Sen. McCain To The Woodshed Over Anti-Tea Party Remarks

Sen. John McCain ruffled America’s already disheveled political feathers today with a Senate floor rant mocking the Tea Party’s position on the debt ceiling debate comparing them to hobbits and disparaging them >>>

Hannity came out swinging at Sen. McCain, wondering why the senator had turned on the Tea Party– “why not attack the President?” Sen. McCain corrected that he did intend to attack the Tea Party but that he disagreed with their obstinacy, especially if it would mean a plan like that of Sen. Harry Reid’s– “one of the most flimsy, transparent, phony spending cut things, proposals, that I’ve ever seen”– being put into law. The alternative to Hannity, however, was Republicans “competing with themselves, which infuriates me a little bit.” He noted that the Rep. Paul Ryan plan in the House was a good start, and that “the House Republicans voted to repeal Obamacare,” all things it frustrated him not to see in the Senate. >>>

“I think Republicans in the House and Senate need to regroup, lock themselves in a room, and get behind one plan.” Sen. McCain disagreed strongly with this, as he argued that the Republicans opposing Rep. John Boehner’s plan were demanding too much. “To somehow think that we don’t need to pay 40% of our bills is just wrong,” he argued. “I saw this movie in 1995… they [Republicans] won’t get to prioritize what doesn’t get paid.” Telling Hannity he was proud of his record, Rep. McCain concluded that “to shut down the government and take the blame for it is not something I want to do… I think the Boehner plan is a viable option; you clearly disagree.”

The major rift between them during the debate was not the Boehner plan, however, but the fact that Hannity did not believe Americans would blame the Republicans for a debt default, supporting the Rep. Connie Mack plan: “the country is going to burn and opportunity is going out the window and we’re saying we can’t cut 1% a year for six years?”

The republican elites are circling the wagons ...

[RightCoast]

1 Trillion+/- over 10 years = 100 billion+/- a year. We borrow 100 billion+/- a MONTH = Republican failure. All republicans have to get behind the "go back to 2008" budget plan, nothing else will stop the collapse of the USA. 

According to Rush the federal budget will be 5.7 TRILLION by 2021, no way we can afford that.

[DumbAss Tanker]

You can't stop a jumbo jet cold in mid-flight, the TEA Partiers are seriously overplaying their hand in this.

All the ad time getting bought for it is by various pro-Dem groups trying to scare the shit out of the SS/Medicare crowd, their ads are going completely unanwered by either the GOP or the TEA partiers.  The public at large isn't going to go to TEA Party websites to get the countervailing information on the real GOP or TEA Party positions.  Without investing any money in mass media buys to present their position, the GOP and TEA Party are both taking a bath in the court of public opinion.   

[5412]

You can't stop a jumbo jet cold in mid-flight, the TEA Partiers are seriously overplaying their hand in this.

All the ad time getting bought for it is by various pro-Dem groups trying to scare the shit out of the SS/Medicare crowd, their ads are going completely unanwered by either the GOP or the TEA partiers.  The public at large isn't going to go to TEA Party websites to get the countervailing information on the real GOP or TEA Party positions.  Without investing any money in mass media buys to present their position, the GOP and TEA Party are both taking a bath in the court of public opinion.   

Hi Tanker,

While I agree with you in principle consider this.  There was a law passed in the Nixon administration that basically said this.  If the budget is passed, each year it is automatically increased by the amount of inflation.  For arguments sake, say the budget was $100 billion and inflation was 10% then the following year the budget automatically jumps to $110 billion.  Then some folks in congress decide to cut spending by $5 billion.  Of course the libs are all over that saying that they are cutting expenses and raising hell.....so then it gets done and the budget only goes up to $105 billion.  What they call cutting expenses is really nothing more than slowing down the rate of spending increases.  Spending still increases in real dollar terms.

The real argument in congress is between truly cutting expenses and the Washington game and BS term "cutting expenses".  The Boehner plan, as I understand it, will not cut expenses a dime, they will continue to increase, only at a bit of a slower rate.  The net effect is about as effective as a fart in a hurricane.  It is business as usual from our congress if it passes.

To me this issue is really much, much bigger.  Washington, meaning both the establishement republicans and democrats alike, have looked at the Tea Party conservatives like a necessary evil and have yet to take them seriously.  This vote could be very strategic; particularly if the Boehner bill is defeated.  That then sends a very loud message there is a new sheriff in town and they mean to stick by their guns.  Then Boehner does not represent the majority of his party and has to step down to get a true conservative speaker. 

Bottom line is this.  It is not time for the conservative house members to get their ass in line, it is Boehner's job to get his ass in line with the majority of the American people.

best personal regards,
5412

[Janice]

Amen to that 5412. You know the Bill that came closer to passing than any other Bill was the Cut, Cap and Balance. It only failed by 3 votes in the Senate. Both Dems and Republicans voted for it. Yet ... they keep trying to pass these other "compromises" that dont even stand a chance of passing and do nothing to address the real problem - spending. That tells me all I need to know about Boehner and McConnells future in Congress. For some reason they cannot seem to fathom that this spending spree is unsustainable. And they are more worried about their own political fortunes and who gets "blamed" than about the future of this country. They are BIG GOVT republicans pure and simple. I want them OUT and REPLACED by conservatives asap.

They are what gives the republican party a bad name. And now they act like "Key Stone Cops" to partner with the democrat clowns and conspire against (the) US (conservatives) to keep this train on track to run it right off the cliff, to hell with the country. A banana republic is apparently fine with them as long as they retain power.

Do you know how many pounds of tea were thrown into the harbor at the Boston tea party? (From Wikipedia: "By dawn, over 342 casks or 90,000 lbs (45 tons!)) I say to hell with them. I wash my hands of this so called "leadership". Long live the TEA PARTY!

[Lacarnut]

Amen to that 5412.  do nothing to address the real problem - spending. That tells me all I need to know about Boehner and McConnells future in Congress. For some reason they cannot seem to fathom that this spending spree is unsustainable. And they are more worried about their own political fortunes and who gets "blamed" than about the future of this country. They are BIG GOVT republicans pure and simple. I want them OUT and REPLACED by conservatives asap.

They are what gives the republican party a bad name. And now they act like "Key Stone Cops" to partner with the democrat clowns and conspire against (the) US (conservatives) to keep this train on track to run it right off the cliff, to hell with the country. A banana republic is apparently fine with them as long as they retain power.

 I say to hell with them. I wash my hands of this so called "leadership". Long live the TEA PARTY!

Great post
Cry baby Boehner better enjoy his 2 years as speaker cause he will not win an election the next time around

[Janice]

We (the tea party) sent 25 representatives to the House this last election. We can keep the pressure up and ask them to continue to Vote NO on the Boehner Debt Plan (S.627). These members are:

Joe Barton (Texas)                (202) 225-2002
Dan Benishek (Mich.)             (202) 225-4735
Dan Burton (Ind.)                  (202) 225-2276
Michael Burgess (Texas)         (202) 225-7772
Kevin Brady (Texas)               (202) 225-4901
Quico Canseco (Texas)           (202) 225-4511
Scott DesJarlais (Tenn.)         (202) 225-6831
Stephen Fincher (Tenn.)         (202) 225-4714
Chuck Fleischmann (Tenn.)     (202) 225-3271
Trent Franks (Ariz.)                (202) 225-4576
Scott Garrett (N.J.)                (202) 225-4465
Morgan Griffith (Va.)               (202) 225-3861
Randy Hultgren (Ill.)                (202) 225-2976
Bill Huizenga (Mich.)                (202) 225-4401
Walter Jones (N.C.)                 (202) 225-3415
Jack Kingston (Ga.)                 (202) 225-5831
Raul Labrador (Idaho)              (202) 225-6611
Tom Latham (Iowa)                (202) 225-5476
Jeff Landry (La.)                     (202) 225-4031
Tom McClintock (Calif.)            (202) 225-2511
Tom Marino (Pa.)                     (202) 225-3731
Jeff Miller (Fla.)                       (202) 225-4136
Devin Nunes (Calif.)                 (202) 225-2523
Ben Quayle (Ariz.)                   (202) 225-3361
Denny Rehberg (Mont.)            (202) 225-3211
Tom Rooney (Fla.)                   (202) 225-5792
Jean Schmidt (Ohio)                 (202) 225-3164
David Schweikert (Ariz.)            (202) 225-2190
Tim Scott (S.C.)                      (202) 225-3176
Marlin Stutzman (Ind.)             (202) 225-4436
Michael Turner (Ohio)              (202) 225-6465
Lynn Westmoreland (Ga.)         (202) 225-5901
Joe Wilson (S.C.)                     (202) 225-2452
Kevin Yoder (Kan.)                  (202) 225-2865

House Republican leaders have postponed indefinitely a vote on Speaker John Boehner's (R-Ohio) debt-limit bill after a row with rebellious conservatives. - Associated dePress

We need to remember to support these reps in coming elections.

 

[rich_t]

Hi Tanker,

While I agree with you in principle consider this.  There was a law passed in the Nixon administration that basically said this.  If the budget is passed, each year it is automatically increased by the amount of inflation.  For arguments sake, say the budget was $100 billion and inflation was 10% then the following year the budget automatically jumps to $110 billion.  Then some folks in congress decide to cut spending by $5 billion.  Of course the libs are all over that saying that they are cutting expenses and raising hell.....so then it gets done and the budget only goes up to $105 billion.  What they call cutting expenses is really nothing more than slowing down the rate of spending increases.  Spending still increases in real dollar terms.

The real argument in congress is between truly cutting expenses and the Washington game and BS term "cutting expenses".  The Boehner plan, as I understand it, will not cut expenses a dime, they will continue to increase, only at a bit of a slower rate.  The net effect is about as effective as a fart in a hurricane.  It is business as usual from our congress if it passes.

To me this issue is really much, much bigger.  Washington, meaning both the establishement republicans and democrats alike, have looked at the Tea Party conservatives like a necessary evil and have yet to take them seriously.  This vote could be very strategic; particularly if the Boehner bill is defeated.  That then sends a very loud message there is a new sheriff in town and they mean to stick by their guns.  Then Boehner does not represent the majority of his party and has to step down to get a true conservative speaker. 

Bottom line is this.  It is not time for the conservative house members to get their ass in line, it is Boehner's job to get his ass in line with the majority of the American people.

best personal regards,
5412

Good ole base line budgeting.  If they simply froze this years expenses and spent the same amount next year (meaning no automatic increase as you mention above) the CBO would probably show that as a 9 trillion dollar cut in expenses.   I heard Rush mentioning this just yesterday.

I know that when I was a supply sergeant in the Army, we always scrambled at the end of each fiscal year to spend every dime in the budget in order to get the increase the following year.  Basically we went out and bought supplies that we didn't actually need just so the unit would get the next budget increase.  I imagine that it is the same across all governmental agencies/organizations.

[formerlurker]

You can't stop a jumbo jet cold in mid-flight, the TEA Partiers are seriously overplaying their hand in this.

All the ad time getting bought for it is by various pro-Dem groups trying to scare the shit out of the SS/Medicare crowd, their ads are going completely unanwered by either the GOP or the TEA partiers.  The public at large isn't going to go to TEA Party websites to get the countervailing information on the real GOP or TEA Party positions.  Without investing any money in mass media buys to present their position, the GOP and TEA Party are both taking a bath in the court of public opinion.   

H5

[Gina]

I feel a little bad for Boehner this morning.  He was dissed by his own party yesterday

[Splashdown]

A weak Boehner means that Obama will control the debate. I'm not so sure that this is going to work out so well for us...

[franksolich]

You can't stop a jumbo jet cold in mid-flight, the TEA Partiers are seriously overplaying their hand in this.

I think so too.

I'm a member of the Tea Party myself, but one has to be realistic about what can be done, and what can't be done.

<<foursquare behind John Boehner.

[Janice]

Apparently Boehner was short 3 or 4 votes last night to get the Bill passed. But today he has added a balanced budget amendment to the Bill to "sweeten the pot" to try and get more conservatives to vote for it. Its understood that he may now have the votes to do just that. So another vote is pending this morning.

It still does nothing to address spending.

[Boudicca]

1 Trillion+/- over 10 years = 100 billion+/- a year. We borrow 100 billion+/- a MONTH = Republican failure. All republicans have to get behind the "go back to 2008" budget plan, nothing else will stop the collapse of the USA. 

According to Rush the federal budget will be 5.7 TRILLION by 2021, no way we can afford that.

Also, remember Rush also pointed out that every year Congress passes a new budget, or they're SUPPOSED to, and yesterday's promises go out the window.  Therefore, if this budget somehow passes, we'd essentially be cutting the deficit by ONE MONTH'S spending and Lord Zer0 would get his money upfront.

[CG6468]

I know that when I was a supply sergeant in the Army, we always scrambled at the end of each fiscal year to spend every dime in the budget in order to get the increase the following year.  Basically we went out and bought supplies that we didn't actually need just so the unit would get the next budget increase.

Same thing when I was spending the money in the Coast Guard, Rich.

[5412]

Apparently Boehner was short 3 or 4 votes last night to get the Bill passed. But today he has added a balanced budget amendment to the Bill to "sweeten the pot" to try and get more conservatives to vote for it. Its understood that he may now have the votes to do just that. So another vote is pending this morning.

It still does nothing to address spending.

Hi,

A balanced budget amendment is mandatory and would change everything.  Problem is that Boehner is likely putting it in to round up votes, then the senate will reject the bill and it will come out in committee when they try to compromise.  What has to happen is Boehner has to believe in the amendment.  Conservatives have to let Boehner they will not stand for it coming back out.  Dick Morris wrote this morning that the conservatives feel this way:

If the president, who is taking a serious popularity hit on this issue, wants to push it past the 2012 election, it must include passage of the balance budget amendment.  If no amendment, then it is a short term issue and comes up next year during the election cycle.

regards,
5412

[Janice]

According to Limbaugh:

We've Been Played for Saps, Folks: Boehner Bill Will Become Reid Bill.



Obama wants Boehner bill to pass and Reid to rewrite it.

Do House Republicans Really Think They're Winning This Thing?

[Lacarnut]

According to Limbaugh:

We've Been Played for Saps, Folks: Boehner Bill Will Become Reid Bill.



Obama wants Boehner bill to pass and Reid to rewrite it.

Do House Republicans Really Think They're Winning This Thing?

Rush has got it right. Boehner and the RINO's got taken to the cleaners in the last budget battle and it looks like the same thing will happen this time around.

[RightCoast]

I think so too.

I'm a member of the Tea Party myself, but one has to be realistic about what can be done, and what can't be done.

<<foursquare behind John Boehner.

We must also be realistic about what this nation can afford, and what we simply can not afford. We borrow over 100 BILLION a month and they can't even agree to cut 10 Billion a month of the borrowed money. Money that was only codified into the budget with porkulus, obamainsurance, and TARP, that debt did not exist before barack.

[5412]

We must also be realistic about what this nation can afford, and what we simply can not afford. We borrow over 100 BILLION a month and they can't even agree to cut 10 Billion a month of the borrowed money. Money that was only codified into the budget with porkulus, obamainsurance, and TARP, that debt did not exist before barack.

Hi,

I would urge all Tea Party members not to set their goals low.  This is a revolution, plain and simple.  We need to change the way our governments do business.  New Jersey and Wisconsin and other states are catching on, the feds will fight it tooth and nail.  We have to push them beyond their historical comfort zone.  Maybe a balanced budget amendment that says if congress cannot honestly balance the budget, none of them are eligible for re-election would be a step in the right direction..

To me this is the first step in Washington taking the tea party seriously.  Understand there is nothing to be afraid of, the vast majority of the public agrees with us.

regards,
5412

[Janice]

Senator Obama Explaining his 2006 Vote Against Raising the Debt Limit

From Sen. Obama’s Floor Speech, March 20, 2006:

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that “the buck stops here.” Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

... Democrats will soon demand that the debt ceiling be raised, lest the sky fall. When they do, they will be asking for a significant boost in a ceiling that is already 60 percent higher than the one Barack Obama said was “a sign of leadership failure” five years ago.

America's chicken(shits) are coming hooome to roost ...

[rich_t]

Hi,

A balanced budget amendment is mandatory and would change everything.  Problem is that Boehner is likely putting it in to round up votes, then the senate will reject the bill and it will come out in committee when they try to compromise.  What has to happen is Boehner has to believe in the amendment.  Conservatives have to let Boehner they will not stand for it coming back out.  Dick Morris wrote this morning that the conservatives feel this way:

If the president, who is taking a serious popularity hit on this issue, wants to push it past the 2012 election, it must include passage of the balance budget amendment.  If no amendment, then it is a short term issue and comes up next year during the election cycle.

regards,
5412

I support a balanced budget amendment in principle, but I'll wait until I see the actual wording of any such amendment before I throw my full support behind it.

It could easily be worded in such a fashion as to authorize/mandate massive tax increases in order to balance the budget.

[thundley4]

I support a balanced budget amendment in principle, but I'll wait until I see the actual wording of any such amendment before I throw my full support behind it.

It could easily be worded in such a fashion as to authorize/mandate massive tax increases in order to balance the budget.

There was some talk at one time about having a built in tax increase trigger if congress didn't cut spending to some preset level.   That's like telling a little kid that if he eats all his candy, he can have dessert.

[5412]

I support a balanced budget amendment in principle, but I'll wait until I see the actual wording of any such amendment before I throw my full support behind it.

It could easily be worded in such a fashion as to authorize/mandate massive tax increases in order to balance the budget.

Hi Rich,

You and I are in total agreement on that one.  I would love for it to demand a balanced budget and if congress and the white house cannot do so none are eligible for re-election.

That would be a good start.

I saw a great line yesterday.  Congressmen and diapers should be changed regularly and both for the same reason........

regards,
5412