john Boehner: Dogcatcher of Mt. Ida, Arkansas?

Is Speaker of the House John Boehner really dogcatcher of Mt. Ida, Arkansas (the small Arkansas town where I spent most of the first 12 years of my life? Of coure not. As I have previoiusly told yu, no one should vote for John Boehner, even for dogcatcher of Mt. Ida. And the good people of Mt. Ida have followed my advice on that. I probably should come up with another example of an insignificant political position, by the way, since my memories of my childhood in Mt. Ida are fond ones, and the town (at least when I lived there) was a very nice small town. Dogcatcher of that town in California whose officials voted themselves extreme six figure salaries? I digress


The point, of coure, is that Boehner has aggain proven himself unworthy of even a position as dogcatcher of Mt. Ida. Even Michele Bachmann should be ashamed of her part in this political theater. You will notice that she, and other "Tea Party" Republicans, as well as many Democrats, got to cast "safe" votes AGAINST a rise in the debt ceiling they knew was going to pass--"safe " because their votes did not matter and because they did not have to deal with a situation where they had to actually deal with the consequences of failing to raise the debt ceiling (never an ultimate option, although one I would have preferred to happen for at least a little while to avoid yet another "politics as usual' last minute "deal" that solved nothing. Just how dumb do these people think we are (these people being the people in Congress, in the mainstream media, and in the White House). NO. It is NOT a matter of "acting like adults" and getting together to "sovle" the problems of this country It is a matter of dealing with the REAL, and not with a fantasy world of your own creation, whose sole purpose is to DECEIVE and confuse the public in general. That is why I proposed keying the debt ceiling extensioin to spending bills each year, so that even CNN could not help but report on the REAL. Appropriatons bills are DUE by the end of September--actually already being overdue--and that is where this fight should really have been waged. Instead, Congress is going into RECESS until in September--meaning we will probably be faced with yet another "Continuing Resolutiono", instead of timely spending bills for the next fiscal year--with the public being informed of how much such bills will ADD to the debt during the next fiscal year.


You will notice that I am not yet walking away from the Republican Party FOREVER, despite this unconscionable sham. But I have confidence in Republicans. I am still confident this is just a matter of time, and not much time--time before I declare that ONLY a third party is the answer. The reason I am not yet going that route is that we did not end up where I FEARED, but only at the least bad point I EXPECTED. We got a sham. But that was always going to happen. What we did not get was the "grand deal"--revenue increases and all--designed to say that the whole deficit/debt problem is "solved", and that it is time to move on to more important things. That is still pretty likely, but it has not yet happened. Therefore, I have not YET walked away from the Republican Party FOREVER. The worst thing about this "fight" over the debt ceiling, however, is that it totally obscured the real fight we should have been having: over SPENDING, and especailly over spending for the next fiscal year beginning October 1 (a mere two months away, and less than a month after Congress comes back). That spendin , for the next fiscal year, will surely INCREASE our debt by well over a TRILLION DOLLARS. That is where I fault Michele Bachmann, even though she is far more principled than most, in that she has been talking aubt the debt ceiling as if a vote on that could "solve' this problem of deficit spending, by magic, without any PAIN. Hogwash, Michele. And I think you know better. You are just better than the rest. I will comment further on the sham debt ceiling bill, but this article is about Boehner.


22 billioin. Out of a 2.7 TRILLION dollars in spending (or 4 TRILLION, or somewhere around that area). That is what this "deal" proposes to "cut" from the spending for next year, without even itemizing those numbers. Less than 1%. In a previous article, I criticized the Republican plan to "cut" 111 billion from next year's spending. We apparently got 1/5 of that. NOTHING. And people are screaming. CNN is running sob stories. WE DO NOT HAVE THE MONEY. Is that too hard to underrstand? And Republicans CONTROL the amount spent. Yes, they do. Don't let Boehner, or anyone else, tell you differently. Our system is set up so that the House has to AGREE (initiate, even) on any spending. We should only be spending money upon which everyone AGREES. This is not a matter of "compromise". It is a matter of system and discipline, which we have abandoned, where you spend only the expenditures AGREED upon, in separate spending bills, and if the House or Senate refuses to authorize spending it simply does not happen. Sure. You can imagine "compromise" to get some lpeople to agree for some spending in exchange for other spending, and that kind of compromise has always happened. But this idea that we should automatically assume that spending will alwalys INCREASE every single year, and that last year's level is the pace we start--except we don't, since the "baseline" assumes INCREAASES--is absurd. Yes, under this Republican "deal", there is a 22 billioin dollar "cut" (maybe)--except there is not. When you take into account Medicare, Social Security and all of the rest, spending will INCREASE again next year. So the "cut" is laess than 1%, except it is not a real "cut' in overall government spending at all. Not nearly good enough.


But if I am unwilling to cast the whole Republican Party into the outer darkness--YET--because of this perfidy, why am I so hard on Boehner? Partly because if Boehner had gotten his way, we WOULD have gotten the "grand deal". Partly because of LIE after LIE--as Boehner played "politics as usual". But it is this sentence that cast Boehner iinot the outer darkness FOREVER (no redemption here):


"We Republicans got 98% of what we wanted."


Say what? What can you say about a statement like that. Here is what I have to say:


"John, nothing shows more clearly why you are NOT qualified to eve be dogcatcher of Mt. Ida Arkansas. YOU DO NOT WANT ENOUGH."


What is funny, of course, is that one of the things Repubilcans "got" is a SHAM "vote" on a Balanced Budget Amendment, againt their own electoral interest. Just as Tea Party Republicans had a "free" vote on the debt ceiling "deal", DEMOCRATS are going to have a "free" votge on a Balanced Budget Amendment, which WILL NOT PASS. If Democrats in the House are smart ,they will even PASS a Balanced Budget Amendment. Then only 35 or so Democrats in the Senate will vote agaisnt it. That will be JUST ENOUGH to DEFEAT the Amendment (requiring a 2/3 vote to pass), and so many Democrats will be able to say they voted for it. Now enough Democrats may think it is to their political advantage to vote AGAINST it to make the sham not quite that blatant, but you can see how the vote will not be real (as this whole spending/debt/deficit debate has not been real). Every member of Congress is going to KNOW that the Amendment will NOT pass, and therefore each will vote ENTIRELY based on sheer political calculation (as Obama, in effect, has admitted he did on the debt ceiling as a Senator from Illinois). I don't know why politicians in Washington think they can continue to get away with this "politics as usual", but I can assure you they cannot get away with it much longer. Oh, maybe it will work for individuals for awhile longer, but the overall approach is DOOMED--the only question being whether the country will be DOOMED first. As I have said, I am NOT saying that all we have to do is "all come together". Hogwash. But we have to be dealing in the REAL. We are not.



As stated, I don't think even Michele Bachmann is dealing totally int he real. (or the other Tea Party people who seemed to say they would simply not ever raise the debt ceiling). But that is harmless hyperbole compared to the "politics as usual" of Boehner, establishment Republicans, Obama, and the Democrats (politician kind). It is as a poster child for "politics as usual" that this blog has condemned Boehner to the outer darkness.


But are Boehner, and people like him, gong to drag the whole Republican Party down with them? I thinks so. This debt "deal" is merely another step in that direction.


P.S. No proofreading or spell checking, as my vacation has not improved my eyesight. However, I did survive my trip to see my feminist daughters, AND the necessary exposure to the Dark Side (represented by Nee York City and Boston). I have made it back to the "light" (Texas), and I am again ready to take no prisoners.



Yes, the debt ceiling deal is a SHAM and a FARCE, but you already knew it would be (if you read this blog).