BREAKING: Boehner Announces Resignation

Ted Cruz says Boehner secretly cut a deal with Pelolsi to fund Obama's agenda until Obama's term expires...in exchange for a "cushy K Street job".

Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz says reports that House Speaker John Boehner agreed to a budget deal with Democrats are ''discouraging'' and questions the speaker's ''behavior.''

Reuters VIDEO:
jp.reuters.com...

a reply to: IAMTAT

That's a heck of an allegation to make. The question is whether there's any substance to it, or is it just to garner some support. I'm leaning more toward the latter. Though it wouldn't suprise me in the least bit if it were true. You'd have an easier time finding water in a desert than someone with character in congress.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Well he's stepping down AFTER the deadline for the budget, and I predict he'll get a budget through. Shutting down the gov. right before an election would look very, very bad for the GOP.

a reply to: dawnstar

For Jeb? Because ... people couldn't possibly hate voting for that more, unless they put Hillary on it.

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: IAMTAT

That's a heck of an allegation to make. The question is whether there's any substance to it, or is it just to garner some support. I'm leaning more toward the latter. Though it wouldn't suprise me in the least bit if it were true. You'd have an easier time finding water in a desert than someone with character in congress.

Hard to prove or disprove. It's where they ALL go.

I think these 8 seconds sum up my thoughts...

a reply to: MystikMushroom

I read something early this morning that they were looking at a stop-gap measure that would last through what I think was December. The hanging point of the measure, so far, was defunding planned parenthood.

So even if he did step down, the same issue for government funding will arrise in December... unless the backroom deal was for a full budget for 2016.

a reply to: EternalSolace

The way I see it, the GOP are backed into a corner.

They can either shut down the government and anger a ton of people, including the moderates they need for the POTUS election...

They can pass a budget with PP funding, and alienate more of their own party....

Neither place is very good to be.

I've said it a few times around ATS ... show me one GOP candidate that can win 270 electoral votes. Starting out of the gate the Democrats practically have all they need to win already. Here's my thread on that subject.

People are not going to like McCarthy the 'favorite' at the moment.

Here is his voting record:

votesmart.org...

The best quote I heard on the news today.

"...conservatives where angry because they thought he worked too hard on negotiations and compromise with president Obama instead of pushing the conservative agenda..."

I've told you guys before that I have a lot of management, School District Management, Family management, business ownership and community group participation and I can tell you that....

The sign of a grown up/Adult is that they can work and compromise with other people to get things done.

Only in the US government is working with others a bad thing and having a temper tantrum a good thing. Pathetic.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Ted Cruz says Boehner secretly cut a deal with Pelolsi to fund Obama's agenda until Obama's term expires...in exchange for a "cushy K Street job".

Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz says reports that House Speaker John Boehner agreed to a budget deal with Democrats are ''discouraging'' and questions the speaker's ''behavior.''

Reuters VIDEO:
jp.reuters.com...

he's tired of insane republicans like Ted Cruz....he sees darkness ahead for the GOP, and doesn't want to be a part of it....

a reply to: amazing

When a voter votes for a politician, they don't expect them to compromise on issues they hold most important to them. Yes, those issues vary from person to person and district to district. But at the same time, there's enough commonality on those issues that they get voted in. It's not unreasonable to expect that a politician hold their ground on an issue that's important to the voter. If said politician compromises or folds on an issue that's important enough, they'll likely lose that vote. That's pretty much why Boehner lost his support.

I'm not saying all compromise is bad, but there are definitely times when it's just not acceptable either.

originally posted by: kosmicjack
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Maybe.

If the Pope visit really and truly moved Boehner, he may have been compelled personally to step down in an effort to not get in the way of the hard right in burning down the house over abortion.

He may have felt his position as Speaker and the relationships across the aisle in an effort to lead might make it difficult to stand on his Catholic principles. So he quit since his party doesn't care for his leadership anyway.

Except that the Pope isn't a Right Wing Hardliner. He's anti-abortion, but he also called out against the hypocrisy of being pro-life while being pro-death penalty. (Also the hypocrisy of seeking to protect the unborn, while feeling no responsibility to their well-being once they are born). He called on us to be more compassionate towards refugees and immigrants, to view them as people, not as numbers. He asked Congress to take responsibility for addressing Climate Change. He also has been pushing a strong Social Justice agenda, including addressing Income Inequality and the responsibility of all those with means to aid those in poverty, while also ensuring opportunity.

I know that the twisted American Right has tuned it's idea of religious ideals to support their political ideology, but an anti-abortion stance and the view that Marriage should only be for heterosexuals are the only things that the American Right finds itself aligned with the Catholic Church on. They conveniently ignore all the rest, especially the parts that require them to proactively work to improve the lives of their fellow man, or to make small sacrifices for the well being of the planet.

The current Pope is probably the most Christ-like, in word and deed, of any man to hold the position. Remove abortion and marriage off the slate and the American Right embodies the antithesis of the Pope's teachings.

The Pope also specifically urged congress to overcome their differences and find ways to work together, he wasn't there to make a Pro-life stance a litmus test on proper governance.

If the Pope's visit had any impact on Boehner's decision to resign, it's perhaps more likely that it was a realization that he's led a decidedly anti-Christ-like political party, rather than a fear that he could not produce a victory against Planned Parenthood, that informed his decision.

BTW, as to abortion, it's been a known political reality for some time that banning abortion outright in the U.S. is just never going to happen. If religious Americans actually wanted to support political action that would reduce the incidence of Abortion in the U.S., they would look at ways of lessening the economic and social costs of unplanned pregnancies which drive so many women to consider or chose an abortion in the first place. That would mean embracing a more Left Leaning politics and rejecting the smug certainty that Push Button Politics seeks to instill in the Republican faithful who vote for people who are against their own economic,(and societal), self interests.

Using surveys meant to gauge political leaning, while avoiding language that triggers Push Button responses, it actually turns out that the American People, on average, lean modestly Left and decidedly Anti-authoritarian. Yet, both of the major American Political Parties lean Right and are Pro-authoritarian, with the Republicans further Right and more Pro-authoritarian than the Democrats. (Someone like Dennis Kucinich, or Bernie Sanders, while being decidedly to the left, actually track as notably more anti-authoritarian than Right Wing "Libertarians" like Ron and Rand Paul. Though the Pauls are decidedly less authoritarian than all other Republicans and most Democrats, they still track in the same quadrant as the Democratic and Republican parties, i.e. Right Wing and leaning pro-authoritarian).

Wonder why American Politics is so messed up? The vast majority have been snookered into voting for people who reflect political agendas in opposition to actual American Ideals, with a false "Us v. Them" dichotomy between two corporatist Political Parties that only vary in degree on how far right they lean and how much they support pro-corporate authoritarianism.

Democratic Socialism would provide a much better fit for root, non-ideology driven, political beliefs of the Average American, but the Corporatists have managed and pruned the two dominant political parties to perfection. Recognizing some discontent, they even brilliantly subverted a large portion of potentially change motivated voters by getting them to attach themselves to the Corporatist created and managed American Tea Party.

The extremism on the modern Right is hard for most moderate, liberal or even just "self-aware-independents" to understand, but the entire purpose is to move both parties further towards Corporatist Fascism and ensure that the political battlefield of "Us vs. Them" takes place entirely within a Right Leaning, Pro-authoritarian landscape.

They recognize that the pendulum must swing, but they have moved the focal point of the pendulum in order to ensure that no matter which way it swings, it remains in territory beneficial to the Corporatist agenda.

I think Boehner has likely felt like a leader trapped in an increasingly surreal Catch-22 analogue, with the Pope's visit and address before congress giving him the moment of clarity and bravery needed to finally hit the eject button.

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: amazing

When a voter votes for a politician, they don't expect them to compromise on issues they hold most important to them. Yes, those issues vary from person to person and district to district. But at the same time, there's enough commonality on those issues that they get voted in. It's not unreasonable to expect that a politician hold their ground on an issue that's important to the voter. If said politician compromises or folds on an issue that's important enough, they'll likely lose that vote. That's pretty much why Boehner lost his support.

I'm not saying all compromise is bad, but there are definitely times when it's just not acceptable either.

But that's what's wrong with our Government. You get elected a Democrat or a Republican and vote your party line, whether it makes sense or not.

In any other part of Society you work together for a solution that benefits everyone. Every single other aspect of society and life, except our government.

Take Planned Parenthood. The one and only issue is Abortion, but instead of having a really good discussion about it, we defund every aspect of Planned Parenthood and all of the STD, Pregnancy and other health issues they help with, and then shut down the government because of it. That's childish.

Take Obamacare. it could be fixed if democrats and republicans sat down and said, Hey here's one thing I don't like about it, can we change it. But no, they'd rather take healthcare from 14-17 million people and take it all away, despite americans wanting healthcare reform.

American politics makes me sick. Compromise is a part of life, to get important things done. You have to work together, Democrats are equally to blame, I understand that, but this thread in particular is about the Repupblicans and they're delusional insistance on not working with someone with a differing view.

Again, only little children act like that, not grown adults.

Good riddance to bad rubbish. Whomever is the next speaker better understand one simple thing...we on the right elected them to do a particular job. They better do the job they were elected to do. In this case, forward the conservative morals and values we have elected you to execute.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
Good riddance to bad rubbish. Whomever is the next speaker better understand one simple thing...we on the right elected them to do a particular job. They better do the job they were elected to do. In this case, forward the conservative morals and values we have elected you to execute.

But why isn't that job to make government work for the people and to work with people off all political views and ideas, even if they differ from yours? Would you rather have someone that wants to work together?

a reply to: amazing

American politics makes me sick. Compromise is a part of life, to get important things done.

I absolutely agree that the ability to compromise is paramount to getting through life. But each and every one of us has a point that when reached, we compromise no further. That's part of life too.

Trick is finding the proper balance... which is near impossible in politics.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Then there is the FACT the reason the House, and SENATE was created was to check the power of the executive.

They weren't created to be the executives 'yes man'.

When all three of those fail it was left up to the judicial to check that power.

When all four of those fail that it becomes the peoples responsibility to check their power.

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: amazing

American politics makes me sick. Compromise is a part of life, to get important things done.

I absolutely agree that the ability to compromise is paramount to getting through life. But each and every one of us has a point that when reached, we compromise no further. That's part of life too.

Trick is finding the proper balance... which is near impossible in politics.

But it is possible if we elect people that are moderate enough to want to work with each other. I'm not a big Bohner fan but I find it telling that Republicans wanted him out of there because he was unwilling to work, compromise and negotiate. Or...as I've said before, they thought he was acting like an adult and wanted some more spoiled brats in there.

Now he can go and work on his tan.