Or so Steve Kornacki asks in his article today on Salon.com. In a nutshell, Kornacki is predicting the demise of Boehner at the hands of the tea party Republicans in the House. What prompted me to duplicate parts of this article is my desire to comment on it. And, I add my own comments in my desire to see how those at the DK who are more knowledgeable than I, view the article and my own thoughts. From the article:
"What we've suspected all along can now be asserted with confidence: John Boehner is a SINO -- Speaker-in-name-only.
Why are House Republicans so unwilling to follow their own leader at such a critical moment? Probably because he really isn't their leader. He's simply the guy who was in place to ascend to the speakership when Republicans regained control of the House in last November's midterm elections."
Kornacki views Boehner as a weakling who is unable to create a winning coalition among the Tea Party and Rank-and-file Republicans. All true. Although he didn't mention it, I would think that the failure to gain repeal of the light bulb ban would be evidence enough. While Nancy Pelosi passes more than 500 pieces of legislation while she was speaker, Boehner is up to the impressive number of 12. I agree, the man is inept, however, I disagree with a more important point in the article.
Kornacki:
"Over and over again during this debt ceiling ordeal, Boehner has been undercut by the true believers in the GOP's ranks. Boehner's basic lack of credibility with the Tea Party crowd was the culprit. He told Republicans his plan was Obama's worse nightmare, and he even got some surprising cover. But many of the voices that resonate most with today's Republican base -- and with the dozens of House members who are a part of that base -- simply wouldn't buy it."
My problem is that it is the Tea Party that is wagging the dog, but it's wagging ALL of the dogs, not just Boehner. Cantor is doing exactly the same thing, maybe more aggressively, but he is also accepting the Tea Party positions as the goal of the Republican Party as a whole. The Tea Party position, appears to be the default, and not negotiable. Cantor does it. Boehner does it. They all do it. But, who is the House of Representatives anyway? I don't know the breakdown precisely but there are 240 Republicans and 193 Democrats. In the Democratic minority, there are 83 members of the Progressive Caucus, about 43%, and a handful of Blue Dogs among others. The Tea Party Caucus, on the other hand, has 60 members, which is an even smaller percentage of the party, 25%.
So, if the Tea Party is 25% of the House and only 15% of the country according to the polls I have seen, then why are they running the entire country as well as the President? WTF? They are a bully, a terrorist organization. Has the entire Congress and White House developed Stockholm Syndrome? Is this like painted fake cattle guards, which everyone thinks can't be crossed?
Doesn't it make a heck of a lot more sense for the leadership to develop majorities that are bipartisan, drawing from normal Republicans and Democrats? Kornacki makes a good point about Boehner but for the wrong reason and does not extend the lack of leadership beyond the Speaker's office. I think it permeates the Republican Party and worse, into the Democratic Party.
I just don't get it. Is everyone except me (and all of you) completely crazy?