Boehner's pickled brain is an embarrassment to all of us, but it should be a cause for alarm in the GOP/TP ~ ~ Sooz

Boehner's bewildering bombast
By Steve Benen



House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) held a press conference this morning to address, among other things, the looming automatic spending cuts called the "sequester," which kick in three weeks from tomorrow. And watching him read his written remarks, it occurred to me that I not only disagree with Boehner, I'm convinced the Speaker -- or whomever is writing his speeches -- is deeply confused about the basics of the fiscal debate.

In other words, I don't just think Boehner is wrong, I also think he's oblivious in ways that are rather alarming given his role in government.

Consider his very first sentence: "The number one priority for the American people is creating jobs and getting our spending under control."

Boehner doesn't seem to understand that (a) spending cuts have already kept unemployment high; (b) more spending cuts will clearly undermine the strength of the fragile recovery; and (c) our spending is already under control.

The Speaker added, "[T]he president and Senate Democrats have done almost nothing to address our long-term debt problems."

Again, it seems as if Boehner has no idea that the president and Senate Democrats have already approved nearly $2.5 trillion in long-term debt reduction. How could he not know that?

The Speaker went on to complain that Obama "didn't announce any specific plans for how he would address" the sequester, followed moments later by Boehner conceding that he hasn't announced any specific plans for how he would address the sequester, either.

Then there was this boast: "Republicans have twice voted to replace the president's 'sequester' with common-sense cuts and reforms that protect our national defense."

Perhaps Boehner missed this in Civics 101, but those votes were in the last Congress, and no longer apply. If the House intends to replace the sequester with an alternative package, that's fine, but the Speaker will have to bring it to the floor and have the chamber vote on it -- because as of now, this House hasn't done literally anything on the issue at all.

Boehner added, "We passed a bill twice to replace the sequester." That's true. It's also irrelevant since it didn't happen in this Congress. The Speaker of the House realizes how the legislative process works, doesn't he?

He added, "Americans do not support sacrificing real spending cuts for more tax hikes." First, he shouldn't speak for the American public, since the American mainstream disagrees with him on nearly everything. Second, Democrats aren't proposing tax hikes; they're proposing closing tax loopholes -- a position Boehner himself agreed with as recently as last month.

Has Boehner forgotten his own positions from a month ago?

The Speaker added, "Listen, the president doesn't believe we have a spending problem. He genuinely believes that government spending causes economic growth."

Obama believes this because (a) we don't have a spending problem; and (b) government spending causes economic growth. That's not even in the realm of opinion, and if Boehner can explain in complete sentences why he disagrees, he's welcome to explain himself (John, really, call me anytime day or night.)

Boehner added that he knows government spending doesn't promote growth because "the unemployment rate is still nearly eight percent."

It's as if the Speaker of the House is a child who finds current events confusing, so he doesn't bother to keep up with the details. In his mind, spending has soared, and unemployment is high, ergo, spending caused higher unemployment. He doesn't have the foggiest idea that spending isn't up and that's contributed to higher unemployment.

"Americans know that another tax hike isn't going to help them," Boehner added. Who's proposing another tax hike? I don't know. Neither does the Speaker.

The poor man is deeply confused. I can appreciating policymakers disagreeing on key issues, but today's display suggests the Speaker of the House hasn't kept up on the basics of civics, economics, current events, or even the fiscal debate itself.

It was a painful and alarming display.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/02/06/16872529-boehners-bewildering-bombast?lite

i lasted almost 2 mins. please send me money.

No one will ever be able to declare the GOP/TP "inconsistent in ideology" ~ no one ... ever ~ emphasis/bolding below is mine ~ there are links to more/corroborating info in the original ~ Sooz

After falling in sequester ditch, GOPers look for way out
By Steve Benen

Remember the Republicans' debt-ceiling crisis in 2011? It was about a year and a half ago when GOP leaders handed President Obama a ransom note: accept more than $2 trillion in debt reduction or the economy gets it. The parties agreed to more than $1 trillion in cuts, but agreed they needed more time to work on a larger agreement.

So, they crafted a mechanism intended to force both sides to the negotiating table -- a sword of Damocles hanging over Washington's head that would be so severe, Democrats and Republicans would have a strong incentive to strike a deal to avoid the drastic consequences.

The mechanism was automatic sequestration cuts -- or "the sequester" -- valued at about $1.2 trillion, half of which would come from the Pentagon. (Democrats originally wanted automatic tax hikes to motivate the GOP, but Republicans refused -- even hypothetical tax increases were deemed outrageous -- and deep Defense cuts were used instead.)

These cuts kick in three weeks from today, and so far, the two sides aren't close. Democrats want a balanced deal the GOP should find tolerable -- spending cuts on one side of the ledger, revenue from closed tax loopholes on the other. Republicans, meanwhile, say they're prepared to simply let the sequester happen, regardless of the consequences to the economy, the military, or the public.

At least, that's what they say publicly. Behind the scenes, the GOP strategy is on shaky ground.


So, the good news is, Republicans are not actively seeking a course that would hurt the country on purpose. The bad news is, they're still struggling with the whole "compromise" concept.

To date, with just 21 days to go, Republicans leaders have offered nothing -- there is no sequester alternative on the table, and in this Congress, no bills to replace the sequester have even been written. There are reportedly 10 different scenarios Republican leaders would be willing to consider, but all 10 are made up entirely of deep spending cuts and would not include so much as a penny in additional revenue.

In other words, Republicans want to replace sequestration with a package that gives them 100% of what they want and 0% of what Democrats want.

This after a national campaign in which Democrats voiced support for a balanced approach, and the American electorate strongly agreed.

It's nice, I suppose, that there are so many Republican-friendly options to choose from -- the menu includes everything from raising the Medicare eligibility age to chained CPI, cutting federal pensions to cutting agricultural subsidies -- but so long as GOP officials expect a 100%/0% deal, the likelihood of a breakthrough is remote.

That said, with three weeks to go, I expect some movement away from the intransigent status quo. Put aside the rhetoric and the posturing and we're left with a picture in which Democrats and Republicans actually have the same goal: to get rid of the sequester. The GOP doesn't want to admit it, but a bipartisan deal, featuring a combination of spending cuts and revenue from closed tax loopholes and unnecessary deductions could come together with relative ease.

What's more, if the automatic sequestration cuts happen, and the economy tanks, Republicans probably realize this will be their fault and they'll likely get the blame. It's why Josh Green wrote late yesterday that a "Republican crackup over the sequester" almost seems inevitable.

As the process unfolds, I'd like to take a moment to throw in my own suggestion: get rid of the sequester. Don't try to replace it, don't struggle to find some satisfying ratio that pleases both sides, don't delay it for a few months, just cancel it. The deficit is already shrinking, spending has already been cut, and if policymakers want to do even more to improve the nation's long-term finances, they can work on a deal without some dangerous threat hanging over their heads.

Sequestration was a bad idea. There's no reason both sides can't agree to get rid of the darn thing and start fighting over something else.

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/02/07/16885721-after-falling-in-sequester-ditch-gopers-look-for-way-out

Buncha stupid drama queens the lot of them.

"Republicans, meanwhile, say they're prepared to simply let the sequester happen..."

yeah... right... you go right ahead.

We will not forgive. We will not forget.

If the Republicans really do that, they will wear it like a yoke around their necks for centuries.

The Dems have their share of blame too!

In fact, the blame lies ENTIRELY with Congress as the President can only 'suggest' or use Executive Orders. But he can not legislate with EO's. The house and the senate carry the blame.

Boehner's pickled brain is an embarrassment to all of us, but it should be a cause for alarm in the GOP/TP ~ ~ Sooz

I always call him "Bonehead" but "Pickle Brain" seems like an apt moniker!

More like "Pickled" Brain.