(UPDATED) Boehner Goes To The Machiavelli Playbook To Try To Deflect Criticism
The routine is now familiar: Senate Republicans are in rare agreement with their Democratic colleagues and the GOP’s House leadership is poised to do likewise, but then reverses field, prompting the party’s Senate leadership to renege on its commitment.
And so in less than 24 hours, House Speaker John Boehner, having said he approved of the short-term, bipartisan Senate measure to extend a payroll tax break and unemployment insurance, turned tail and said his colleagues (read the Tea Party) opposed the two-month extension, setting the stage for yet another bitter Capitol Hill showdown over Boehner’s preference to extend the tax break and unemployment insurance for a full year.
That had been the Democrats’ original intention, but it would have been paid for by increasing taxes on 1 percenters and closing tax loopholes, something that Republicans of course would not support.
And then there was a twist that Machiavelli would have approved of as the Senate adjourned and representatives chaffed at the bit to do the same.
Under fire from GOP senators, House Republicans prepared to vote today against the Senate measure, demanding that the Senate reopen negotiations over the benefits.
Democrats, however, understand that because of Boehner’s ineptness, they have (again) stolen a march on him and are firm that they will not return to Washington until the House passes the short-term bill, which Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell negotiated and voted for, along with 38 other Republican senators.
Rather than have a straight up-or-down vote today, Boehner will implement a procedural maneuver in which his caucus will “reject” the Senate bill while requesting to go to conference with senators in a single measure, protecting House members from having to actually vote against extending a payroll tax cut.
Many voters will know better than to fall for this flapdoodle, as well as the reality that if Congress cannot agree to an extension, a year-end tax increase would kick in, something that economists have warned could set back a fragile economic recovery.
Boehner had initially tried to persuade his colleagues that the two-month extension was good for the GOP because it contained a provision that would speed the decision process for construction of an oil pipeline from Canada to the Gulf Coast known as Keystone XL. President Obama had threatened to veto that provision.
19 Responses to “(UPDATED) Boehner Goes To The Machiavelli Playbook To Try To Deflect Criticism”
I don’t know what to think of this particular latest kick, or don’t kick, the can down the road, but this can kicking is a pain you know where.
It is becoming a habit and will get harder and harder to break. Both sides do it and it does not inspire any feeling of confidence about the current leadership.
Is there any doubt whom is trying to screw whom in congress? Yes, and as always, the Republicans are trying to screw the Democrats whom are trying to help the majority of people in this country.
To hell with the Republican party and their one percent!
I have to wonder just how many Republicans (in the House) were really against this. Is Boehner really trying to claim that so many Republican House members were against the legislation that, with Democratic House members, it would still be impossible to pass the bill–a bill that Senate Democrats voted for in large quantities?
What ever happened to the House and Senate coordinating such bills? Oh, right, Gingrich, Rove and their ilk started vilifying their opponents. If the extension does not go through, the political bonanza for the Democrats will be enormous. I wonder if, at least in secret, many of the Democrats (in congress, the WH, and looking to get into congress) secretly hope that the Tea Party creeps have finally over-stepped their positions.
It is one thing to plot in secret the subjugation and/or destruction of a huge quantity of people (think the bottom 30-40%); it’s something else entirely to advertise that you are doing it. I am reminded of Dagny Taggert’s vision of fat majarjahs sitting on their piles of rubies while their peasants starve. Interestingly enough, it is the ones who claim to be following Ayn Rand who are planning to buy the rubies and starve the peasants.
“The reversal of field should be deeply embarrassing for the Republican congressional leadership”
That particular threshold is beyond the reach of any instruments or technology we now possess.
“both sides do it”
Tribal reflexes die hard eh duck?
I’m trying to imagine what the Pubs would have said about Nancy Pelosi if she had Boehner’s record of “success”. Of course, in the 1%’ers minds he IS a success because he is representing their interests-not the rest of us.
The number one goal was to make Obama a one-term president-not to give the middle class tax relief!
In addition, they want to prove that government doesn’t work and they proved it!
Tremendously successful!
I hate to come to the Orange Man’s defense but trying to lead or influence the Republican Freshman Class of Teahardists is like trying to herd cats. The guy had an impossible job and with Eric Cantor constantly trying to stick a knife in his back there was no way he could succeed.
JS, said: “Tribal reflexes die hard eh duck?”
Finally you admit it. Good for you.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/house-gop-passes-payroll-tax-cut-bill-obama-has-threatened-to-veto.php
Somehow I am missing something. The house passed the dang bill days ago and the senate rejected it and sent their own version.
I don’t understand how the house can pass something, have Reid call it dead on arrival and then blame the Republicans for the stalemate!!!
But then, this is a liberal website, so that could have something to do with the articles written
I think it seems that you also have a problem with understanding the sequence of events and how government works. The House passes something that its members know will never become law. It won’t make it through the Senate, much less get the signature of the President. Everyone is convinced that the Tea Party branch will not vote for what the Senate really wants, which is a clean and simple bill to take care of the payroll tax cut and unemployment. They didn’t draw that conclusion from thin air. Basically, the TPers had let it be known that they wouldn’t let the bill pass without a ton of things in it that they knew didn’t stand a chance. That’s obstructionism. They didn’t want to negotiate, they just wanted everyone else to give them what they wanted. When a bill was passed so that there would be another couple of months to negotiate a longer term deal they then try to claim that they really want a year long deal. No, they don’t. At least not unless they get everything they want. So yes, it is their fault since they are incapable of negotiating in good faith.
@RP
Let me see if I can explain this in simple terms. The House’s bill was dead on arrival; they were told it was dead on arrival; they passed it anyways.
The Senate bill was given a tacit approval by Boehner and was, therefore, passed.
Boehner now rejects the bill he agreed to (because of extreme elements in his party). They will not pass the bill their leader agreed to.
Difference: one side negotiated in good faith (Senate) the other side did not.
Now do you understand the difference?
Rcoutme:
That’s it in a bit.
Boehner and McConnell… hard to say which of the two is a greater waste of taxpayer money. What is this great love republicans have for fools and con artists?
Oh, my, JS, you have pointed out the obvious, that we Republicans are fools and fools love con artists. Hope and change will convert us some day when we are eating bark and rodents in our bankruptcies as the great society envelopes us.
Did I hit a nerve duck? What is “obvious” is that it isn’t obvious enough. Re: eating rodents, ever had southern fried rabbit? BBQ Muskrat?
Yes, I admit you have a nerve. Always calling the other side out and never straying from the party line is quite obvious, and here comes your favorite term: “both sides do it”.
Having been to SE Asia, I’m sure I had some rodents at times. Rabbit is quite tasty, had it many times. Have you ever eaten crow.
@ Ron Beasley: You hit the nail on the head about the man of the orange skin. Though I do object to your description of him. Herding cats is much, MUCH easier than herding Tea Partiers. Plus, cats have more respect for their herders than Tea Partiers.
Duck-
Rodents, rabbits’n crows? (banjo picking)
Yew sure gotta purdy beak…..i’mona pluck yew duck….
Ah duck always with the humor. The thing I try not to stray from though is what is right, not what is partisan. Sorry you find that so offensive. As for eating crow? I wish I was wrong more than I am.
“I wish I was wrong more than I am.”
New Year’s wish, may you always be able to tell the difference between partisan and right/wrong.
BTW: I hope I’m able to “always” be with the humor.