Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Van Hollen On House GOP: 'Speaker Boehner Is Not In Control'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 05:36 PM
Original message
Van Hollen On House GOP: 'Speaker Boehner Is Not In Control'

Van Hollen On House GOP: 'Speaker Boehner Is Not In Control'

Evan McMorris-Santoro

<...>

"Speaker Boehner is not in control," Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) said on a conference call with reporters when asked about the prospects of a shutdown by TPM. "The tea party caucus has their hands on the steering wheel and they are prepared to drive right into a government shut down if they don't get 100% of their demands met."

<...>

"To pretend that they care about deficit reduction here when their real goal is to use this budget battle to impose that social agenda is becoming more obvious everyday," Van Hollen said.

He says that the man leading the negotiations for the Republicans in Congress, Boehner, has become nothing more than a proxy for his party's far-right extreme.

"None of us of course know how this is going to turn out," Van Hollen said, "but the Speaker is not in control of this process."

"He's being pushed rather than leading," Van Hollen said.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Ramulux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. Is this a joke?
John Boehner and the republicans have completely and totally controlled this entire debate while democrats sat back and agreed with almost all of his outlandish demands.

Its fucking pathetic listening to democrats trying to pretend like they are pulling some sort of secret smart last-minute strategy or something. We lost, and we lost because our leaders have no principles or convictions and didn't even attempt to offer up an alternative way of looking at how to reduce the deficit. Its either insane, draconian, unrealistic cuts or just a lot of cuts. There aren't two sides to this debate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. No,
but I'm laughing at this comment.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ramulux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. What?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #4
15. I said:
"I'm laughing at this comment."

How many of Boehners' teabagger-driven legislation made it out of Congress?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. What garbage! Prove that "democrats sat back and agreed with almost all of his outlandish demands."
Edited on Thu Apr-07-11 07:32 PM by ClarkUSA
Just today, President Obama issued a veto threat, so it appears you are wrong on all counts.

In fact, here's my proof that you're wrong via today's New York Times:

Mr. Boehner expressed disappointment that the president had vowed to veto a new Republican-backed stopgap measure that the House passed on Thursday by a vote of 247 to 181.... Congressional officials said that the sparring over money had gotten down essentially to a fight over $5 billion or less. Mr. Boehner, whose bid for $40 billion in spending cuts was rejected on Wednesday, came back on Thursday with a proposal for $39 billion in cuts, the officials said, while the Democrats top budget aides, working through the night, returned Thursday morning with a proposal for $34.5 billion in cuts, $3 billion of it coming from Pentagon spending.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/08/us/politics/08fiscal....


Note that the Teabaggers in the House had campaigned on getting $100 billion in cuts. Now they are lowering their sights all the way down to $40 billion and the Democrats are rejecting it, too.

What's "fucking pathetic" is the bullshit "democrats are weak" meme that are constantly pushed around here that mirror RNC talking points. What's "insane" is that facts don't seem to matter to Obama's opponents on either side of the aisle, as long as they can get their licks in.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ramulux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Insane
First off, the teabagger number is absurd and not realistic in the slightest and should not even be part of these negotiations.

John Boehner wants $40 billion in cuts. We are giving him $34.5 billion. How is that not anything short of complete and total defeat. He got 7/8 of what he wanted and we got nothing. This was not a negotiation. This was republicans pulling a massive childish stunt and democrats just going along with it. The idea of cutting all this in the middle of a recession is fucking insanity, yet somehow you are claiming victory because we got the republicans down to 34.5 from 40? billion? There is no other side to this argument. Its not republicans saying they want cuts and democrats saying they want tax increases, its republicans demanding something and democrats demanding nothing.

We lost this entire debate because no case was made by us. We have completely and totally allowed the republicans to push this idea that the only way to reduce the deficit is with massive cuts to non-defense spending. There was no counter, no democrats demanding something in return for these cuts, no compromise, just republican demands and democratic capitulation.

How you see this budget negotiation as anything other than a complete and total surrender is beyond me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. It's clear that you are unable to objectively prove your claim, given the facts I have shown you
Edited on Thu Apr-07-11 09:25 PM by ClarkUSA
For the Teabagger House to go from loudly demanding $100B at the beginning of their term in Congress to possibly settling in the neighborhood of $34.5B is nothing less than a resounding and embarrassing defeat for their 2010 RNC talking point campaign promises to their base, given that Democrats started their negotiation at $10B.

It's easy to see which side compromised more when you look at the numbers objectively. Hint: It isn't President Obama and the Democrats in Congress, as you are falsely claiming, Ramulux.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ramulux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #10
23. You ignored everything I said
and didn't respond to a single point I made. If you dont offer up a counter argument to the points I make, I cant respond to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. You are entitled to your opinion but I am more of a fact-based type of person.
Edited on Thu Apr-07-11 10:43 PM by ClarkUSA
I just disagree with you on all of your "points" because of the facts I mentioned. Thanks for taking the time to share your POV, though. This is a discussion forum and I realize that many of us look at things differently.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vroomvroom Donating Member (496 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Ramulux, you are not alone -- 100% Agree with you. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Why do you agree with him? The facts bear neither of you out.
Or don't the facts matter to you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. That's what John Boehner would have us believe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
24. He's a twit!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 06:28 PM
Response to Original message
5. good thing for Boner that Obama is yet again asking dems to compromise more and more eh? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. "good thing for Boner"
that the teabaggers have him on a short leash?

Can Boehner Really Deliver?

David Kurtz

Just a quick observation on the budget talks. There's a difference between being a negotiator and having the authority to negotiate, and I'm starting to wonder if Speaker Boehner has full negotiating authority from the House GOP conference. It's a big difference, and it can affect how negotiations proceed.

A negotiator with limited negotiating authority can present his side's case and listen to the other side's. He can dicker some and argue back and forth. But when push comes to shove, that kind of negotiator is basically a messenger, not a principal -- and that makes it difficult to do get a deal done.

It can lead to what we're seeing here: frequent short negotiating sessions that are interrupted so that the negotiator on a short leash can confer with his principals, pass on the latest message and devise a response. It short circuits one of the features of an intense negotiation, which is to create a pressure-cooker environment that melts away the extraneous issues and forces the parties to deal with the core disagreements.

If you've ever been in a negotiation where the opposite side is a loosely associated group or committee, like the House GOP conference is, you know how frustrating it can be not to have a fully empowered negotiator representing them. All of your efforts to nail down the specifics are rebuffed with marshmellowy vagueness. The harder you press, the mushier they get.

more

Obama Threatens to Veto House GOP Bill As Lawmakers Predict Shutdown
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
7. Damn, this will mean more crying! n-t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeanpalmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
11. Everyone knows how this is going to end
Obama has already signalled he wants to compromise. He's willing to give them a lot of what they want. And the Republicans know it. Keep giving them half of what they want, and over time they get it all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Wrong. The Teabagger House campaigned on cutting $100B from the budget in 2010.
Edited on Thu Apr-07-11 09:34 PM by ClarkUSA
For the Teabagger House to go from loudly demanding $100B at the beginning of their term in Congress to possibly settling in the neighborhood of $34.5B is nothing less than a resounding and embarrassing defeat for their 2010 RNC talking point campaign promises to their base, given that Democrats started their negotiation at $10B.

It's easy to see which side compromised more when you look at the numbers objectively. Hint: It isn't President Obama and the Democrats in Congress, as you are falsely claiming, jeanpalmer

Proof of how low Republicans might go:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeanpalmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Meanwhile, the country continues
its march to Armageddon while these two parties try to score cheap political points. The cuts have to be much bigger than $30 billion, or even $100 billion, and it has to come out of defense spending. Neither of these parties is serious. I expect that of Republicans, but not the party I've voted for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. Meanwhile, the doomsday rhetoric and Democratic Party bashing continues... regardless of the facts.
Edited on Thu Apr-07-11 09:56 PM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. The Teabaggers should ask to refund war spending - millions for warplanes
the amount spent in Iraq and Afghanistan would pay for trillions of cups of tea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. Heh... I'd pay for you to say that to Rand Paul's squirrelly face.
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. A teabag for every $ spent in Afganistan - would be quite a mound!
one enormous heap - can you imagine if it was constructed outside the congress. offices?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DCBob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
19. The more I hear Chris speak the more I like him.. .
He is rapidly growing into the voice and face of the of Democratic party. I suspect we will see this guy running for higher office in the near future. He has been my congressman since 2002 when he beat a very popular left leaning Republican Connie Morella.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. He is one of the best
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Dec 20th 2014, 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC