Skip to main content

U.S. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) (L) looks on as House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) speaks to the media on the
On Sunday, John Boehner said: "There's no plan from Senate Democrats or the White House to replace the sequester." As a factual matter, that's false–both the White House and Senate Democrats have a plan to replace the sequester. In fact, their plan got 51 votes in the Senate last week, but thanks to the filibuster, Senate Republicans were able to block it.

It's true that Republicans don't like the Democratic plan, but that's not what Boehner said. He said that Democrats simply don't have a plan, an assertion that was obviously bogus. But that isn't stopping his spokesman from defending it:

With both of those "plans" easily found in official records and news reports, we asked Boehner’s spokesman Brendan Buck how the speaker could claim that none exists.

"A plan must demonstrate it has the ability to pass a chamber of Congress to be worth anything. We’ve twice passed a plan. We’re still waiting for the Senate to pass something, anything," Buck told PolitiFact in an email.

That's completely absurd. If Boehner wanted to say Senate Democrats haven't passed a plan, he could have said that, but he didn't. And if he had, it would have been fair to point out that the reason they haven't passed a plan is that Republicans are filibustering their plan. But that's not what Boehner said. He said neither the White House nor Senate Democrats had a plan, period—and that's just not true.

It's also worth pointing out that it's equally absurd for Boehnerland to claim that they've twice passed a sequester replacement. Those votes came during the previous Congress and they narrowly passed. It's unlikely they would pass again during this Congress, but even if it were likely, the fact that they passed during the previous Congress is nothing more than the answer to a trivia question. From a legislative perspective, what Republicans passed last year is no more relevant than what Democrats passed three years ago.

But even though I think it's worth pointing out that John Boehner is lying when he claims Democrats don't have a plan to replace the sequester, it's actually unfortunate that he is lying. We should be repealing the sequester—not debating about replacing it.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  NO PLAN (5+ / 0-)

    Well like I said before, there was no plan, because if the Repukes didn't come up with a new Sequester plan, that as far as the Boner is concerned, the plan doesn't exist.

    Oh Boner, what are you going to do!!

    Somebody knock the tan off of him

    •  This is priceless... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      skod, No Exit, Clem Yeobright

      Harry Reid doesn't abolish the filibuster and Boehner is now rubbing Harry's face in it.

      We’re still waiting for the Senate to pass something, anything," Buck told PolitiFact in an email.
      What the heck is wrong with Harry? We knew this was going to happen, so why didn't he? And now Republicans are boasting about the Senate's inability to get anything passed.
      Just wow.
      •  Because Mitch McConnell promised Harry (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        No Exit, RagingGurrl

        He would really let him kick the football.

        "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals, now we know that it is bad economics." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jan. 20, 1937

        by Navy Vet Terp on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:32:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  So, let me see... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RagingGurrl

        After claiming that the Democrats had "no plan," Republicans are now moving the goal posts of what constitutes a "plan" -- a plan that will pass the legislature.

        ... Well the plan would easily pass through the Senate, if the Republicans didn't insist on filibustering -- which, as I recall, they pinkie-swore not to do a little while back!

        So the new high bar for the suggestion of a viable "plan" is one that can obtain a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate -- meaning Republicans still hate it enough to filibuster it -- but just short of the 40 necessary haters.

        Yeah, okay. Thanks for coming out, Boehner et al.

        Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of non-thought. -- Milan Kundera

        by Dale on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:59:02 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Politics as usual (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          RagingGurrl

          This is the way the game is played.

          To paraphrase George R. R. Martin, when you play the game of politics, you either win or you retire. (With all apologies to Mr. Martin)

          "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

          by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:59:07 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  It really wasn't a plan (0+ / 0-)

      to replace the sequester.

      It totally eliminated it for 2013 and lessened the cuts for 2014.

      So, I guess that is technically replacing it.. but.. lol.. just lol..

  •  There you go again, Jed ... (6+ / 0-)

    Introducing facts into what had been a perfectly delightful conversation ....

    Too late for the simple life, too early for android love slaves - Savio

    by Clem Yeobright on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:06:19 AM PST

  •  Romney was the protypical Republican. (3+ / 0-)

    When they open their mouth, they lie.

    Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

    by TomP on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:06:54 AM PST

    •  Ryan is worse (0+ / 0-)

      Romney's acceptance speech at the RNC was so so, and I don't recall any lies.  Ryan had me shouting at the TV screen with all his lies.

      "We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals, now we know that it is bad economics." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Jan. 20, 1937

      by Navy Vet Terp on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:33:28 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Rmoney finally admitted it (0+ / 0-)

      in his Sunday interview, when he said,

      "What I said is not what I believe."

      Classic.  This one phrase pretty much sums up his entire campaign.

      And the simple fact that this statement isn't getting wall to wall play says it all.

      Get to the bunkers, boys.

      In Washington, whenever anyone does something wrong, everyone else gets punished.

      by Noziglia on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:55:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Romney had a campaign? (0+ / 0-)

        Hunh.  I thought he was trying out for P. T. Barnum & Baily Circus.

        Well colour me informed!

        ...and what a bitter pill to swallow that he still garnered 47% of the popular vote.

        New colour:  depressed.

        "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

        by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:57:30 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  So sick of hearing his lies (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skillet, Jack Hare, Cats r Flyfishn, ferg

    the one that bothers me the most is that one that he repeats over and over again about there not being a budget in years.  I thought that it was his job to get one thru Congress, in the 1st place?

  •  Boehner doesn't look very sharp (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skillet

    Photo puns while you wait.......

    I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

    by JML9999 on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:09:15 AM PST

  •  Speakers (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JML9999, Clem Yeobright

    Looks like we should have given Bob Livingston a chance at that job.  

    •  That's not a joke (0+ / 0-)

      What IS a joke is the way he went out ...

      Not that he hasn't done about as well as Billy Tauzin, but the ridicule must be rough on his kids. Then again, he's not Mark Sanford, is he?

      Too late for the simple life, too early for android love slaves - Savio

      by Clem Yeobright on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:22:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Beam me up Scotty....there's no intelligent life (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JML9999, Brooke In Seattle

    down here.

  •  Yet just a couple days ago GOP House members (0+ / 0-)

    claimed they vote for the Violence Against Women Act, even though they voted for the weaker version that didn't pass.

    Form follows function -- Louis Sullivan

    by Spud1 on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:12:48 AM PST

  •  Boehner would (0+ / 0-)

    probably choke on truthful words so therefore he lies and then he lies some more.  Alcoholics lie a lot.

  •  What's more unfortunate is (0+ / 0-)

    that when Speaker Boehner's lips are moving we can be pretty confident that he is lying.

    America is a COUNTRY, not a CORPORATION. She doesn't need a CEO. Vote Obama.

    by manneckdesign on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:14:25 AM PST

  •  Senate plan got 51 votes... (0+ / 0-)

    Could the House plan passed last congress get 60% like the broken Senate requires?  

    They're in desperation spin mode.  Their majority shrank this past election - and what they passed last congress doesn't matter a lick, because new congress means all outstanding bills head to the garbage can and you start over.  

    If you're not talking about what billionaire hedgefund bankster Peter G. Peterson is up to you're having the wrong conversations.

    by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:14:52 AM PST

  •  That's rich (0+ / 0-)
    "A plan must demonstrate it has the ability to pass a chamber of Congress to be worth anything. We’ve twice passed a plan. We’re still waiting for the Senate to pass something, anything,"
    A chamber.  HA!   How convenient?  The only plan is "their plan".

    Plus, one chamber need 50% and another needs 60%.  

    But...people will buy this utter nonsense.  Our media in action.

    "Small Businesses Don't Build Levees" - Melissa Harris Perry

    by justmy2 on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:15:08 AM PST

  •  I think the primary problem we have... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Clem Yeobright, Navy Vet Terp

    is our expectations for Speaker Boehner's integrity are entirely too high.

    He's demonstrated contempt for the Office of the Presidency and the Senate on a number of occassions.  He's categorically denied any involvement with the sequester, even while crowing about getting "98% of what he wanted."  He's both condemned and taken credit for the sequestration.

    This guy is as bipolar as my ex-wife.

    And yet, we act suprised with every new calumny that crosses his lips.

    When, and only when, we collectively - as a society - realize that the Speaker leads a faction of irrational actors, we will be free to move past this era of obstructionism and trade-wind politics.

    Until that day comes, keep your expectations low.  I know it's hard, painful, and agonizing to see our country becoming a Union of the Lowest Common Denominator, but that only serves to inspire me to action, rather than passive acquiesence.  As a reformed "Conservative Democrat," (read:  Republican apologist who clung to the centre because it was comfortable, and in the majority) I have come to the realization that it was that very passive acquiesence in me, and many others just like me, that has led to the country being eviscerated by corporate interests, hatemongering fundamentals, and, ultimately, the very bane of a democratic free market:  plutocracy.

    Let me qualify that statement.  A democratic free market works, in theory, due to the fact that all people have access to all information about all products.  Thus, Joe Consumer can make an informed decision about anything from his brand of toothbrush, to his car purchase, to his stand on political issues and party alignment.  While it sounds wonderful on paper, the reality of the situation is that corporate interests demonstrably control what is said about their products, politicians demonstrably control what is said about them, and public perception is somewhere between information overload ("This is too complication, I'll 'vote with my heart.'," which is the death-knell to any sort of progressive thought, since emotion should never enter into a discussion concerning society) and willful ignorance ("Because Rush said so!")

    Let me summarize the main thrust of my post/rant thusly:  The primary problem we are having is that we are setting unrealistic standards on this guy.  We know he's nuts, but we expect him to act sane.  The general public would know this, too, but for the fact that the Republican Party, and, by extention, the corporate world, has spent tons of money to prevent that knowledge from being disseminated.

    "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

    by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:15:59 AM PST

    •  Geez, you could make a grown man cry! (0+ / 0-)

      Too late for the simple life, too early for android love slaves - Savio

      by Clem Yeobright on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:24:16 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Heh (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Clem Yeobright

        not sure if compliment or complaint ;p

        I try to articulate any argument I am making with corrolary evidence, and to draw conclusions based on dispassionate logic, rather than passionate emotion.  I think that is the cornerstone of any healthy debate.  Being brought up with a Jewish background, debate is one of the few things I was raised to be good at, and succeeded.

        Clearly marriage wasn't one of those things, heh.

        If only I could take this message nationwide, and convince people that their emotive responses to EVERY.SINGLE.ISSUE.PRESENTED. is what is destroying this country and the foundation for what all of the citizenry, Democrat, Republican, Greener, Libertarian, or what have you, believes in (a free democratically elected government), then I think the world would be a better, more enlightened place.

        The sooner we get preachers, priests, et al to stop using the pulpit as a political tool, the better, as well.  If only the IRS would crack down on churches meddling in politics.

        "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

        by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:31:54 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  not a lie as long as team limbaugh can blast US (0+ / 0-)

    with it all day long.

    those radio stations have to stop getting a free speech free ride before we can have any fact-based discussion on any major issue. they're creating their own facts and their radio monopoly does the groundwork for it, yet there is still no organized response from the left to that scripted coordinated radio propaganda.

    This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and GOP lies by broadcasting sports on over 170 Limbaugh radio stations.

    by certainot on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:16:08 AM PST

    •  Interesting observation, but I disagree... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clem Yeobright

      I will defend to the death the right to free expression.  I agree that lying, slander, libel, and other behaviour is reprehensible (and only serves to endanger that right), and I agree that their hate-machine is responsible for many of society's ills (Even Boehner feels it, as the Tea Party wing of the R's demonstrates quite regularly), this is one of the founding tenants of a free democracy.

      To summarize, yeah, it's disgusting that these people get away with lying (and getting paid well for it!), but I'd rather they do, than have our free speech regulated.

      "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

      by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:22:25 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  your brother is a traitor and your sister is a ho (0+ / 0-)

        and that's what they've been saying about all liberals for 25 years from every corner and stump in the country and the left basically STILL walks by with their iPods in their ears, getting their internet asses kicked on a regular basis (except finally for the recent boycotts)

        they bought a monopoly and they protect it from competition and use it for coordinated think tank-generated propaganda- giving RW radio a free speech free ride is stupid.

        but I'd rather they do, than have our free speech regulated.
        that's the RW talking point- the biggest PC cop and censor-by-threat in this country is team limbaugh. RW radio is the best weapon they have for corporatizing and privatizing all forms of media, transmission, information.

        if there as real competition (as opposed to a RW monopoly), limbaugh would be blasting from 100 stations, mostly in the south, not 600.

        This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and GOP lies by broadcasting sports on over 170 Limbaugh radio stations.

        by certainot on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:47:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I still respectfully disagree (0+ / 0-)

          Don't get me wrong, I believe that the plug should be pulled on their garbage-spouting mouths.  The unfortunate reality is this:  that's censorship.  I'm against censorship in all of its forms.  Sure, it sounds good, but the fact of the matter is, it's still censorship.  I don't want my blog posts, comments, or what have you censored.  I categorically oppose CISPA, for instance.  Censorship often sounds like the greatest good for the greatest number, but that's simply situational ethics.

          I can't get behind the idea of, say, the FCC shutting them down.  I just can't.  I want to, I truly do, but every logical bone in my body screams in protest when I consider taking that stand.

          That having been said, I do understand your point.  Truly I do.  And I believe that there should definately be oversight on what is being passed as fact, versus what's being passed as editorializing.  To intentionally misrepresent the truth, and pass it off as fact should very well be illegal.  But to shut down the RW hate machine, we would have to obstruct their ability to state an opinion as well.  And that, plain and simple, is censorship.

          "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

          by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:02:00 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  the left has NO organized opposition to the propag (0+ / 0-)

            anda. the boycott addresses the hate speech genarelly- not the organized coordinated propaganda that makes everything progressive so much harder.

            i've seen very little talk of shutting anyone up- that's not what i nor others are saying.

            all the left has to do is stop ignoring it. monitor it, respond to it in real time, protest the stations, get our universities out of it (see my sig), respect it for the fact that it has made THE big difference the last 25 years.

            the only reason it has worked so well the last 25 years is the left has walked on by, equating coordinated think tank corporate propaganda from 1000 radio stations reaching 50 mil a week, protected by call screeners, prompted by paid callers, with one guy with one soapbox.

            leaving that alone is democratic suicide, and has resulted in the  morphing of the GOP into the teabagger party.

            This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and GOP lies by broadcasting sports on over 170 Limbaugh radio stations.

            by certainot on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:22:03 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Thank you for clarifying your position. (0+ / 0-)

              First, let me apologize for misunderstanding you, and responding with a knee-jerk statement.  That's the very thing I speak out about most often, and I'm guilty of it.  Give me a moment to wipe the egg off my face.

              ...

              OK, done.  Thanks for your patience, your call is important to us, and will be answered in the order in which it was received.

              Now, then, I agree wholeheartedly with this:

              all the left has to do is stop ignoring it. monitor it, respond to it in real time, protest the stations, get our universities out of it (see my sig), respect it for the fact that it has made THE big difference the last 25 years.

              An on-the-ground game of rapid response to slanderous, libelous, and otherwise patently false information is critical in dispelling this society of misinformation.  On that we agree.

              What suggestions do you have for the following problems I foresee:

              1)  Getting past the call screeners.  These gatekeepers are given a task of not letting "whackjob liberal morons" through unless their position is easily decimated by the man with the bully pulpit microphone.  Those select few are then evicerated on the air, and put forth as proof that His works are Good. (caps intentional, as the man clearly has a God complex.)

              2)  How does this ground game translate into getting through to our target audience?  We are already converts, we already know what's what, or at least, we have the open-mindedness to carefully consider the policy being debated before attacking or defending it.  (Broad generalization, yes, but I think by and large it plays out, at least on DKos.)  How do we get Average Joe Listener to hear us, listen to us, and accept our standpoint, or at least, be willing to debate the merits and flaws of our standpoint in an open, honest, and independant forum?

              Finally, let me thank you for your measured and rational responses.  It's a refreshing intellectual exercise to have someone disagree with me without resorting to straw man arguments, ad hominem attacks, and other forms of viceral responses.

              "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

              by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:47:33 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Thanks . I'll get back to you soon . (0+ / 0-)

                This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and GOP lies by broadcasting sports on over 170 Limbaugh radio stations.

                by certainot on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 11:33:36 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  i had to go (0+ / 0-)

                thanks for the interest in my opinion. since you were relatively new i may have sounded a bit loud- there are trolls....

                on 1) i'd agree getting past call screeners is a problem but it shouldn't be a serious effort - that's more about having fun at their expense. the national talkers shouldn't even be considered for that purpose. it has happened in the past but too rarely. some local talkers take real calls from liberals and some are better than others as far as those callers making a difference. just showing up even if its to call out a lie is important. but the caller may be tagged with a skull and crossbones instead of a smiley face on the call screening software and that may be the end of it. a serious lefty friend maintained a long time relationship with one local talker who wasn't an idiot teabagger but still an idiot, and he'd call a few times a month and get through and often make good points that were heard by tens of thousands.

                re 1 and 2 though, IMO the most important thing for the left to do is elevate the talk radio gods to the status they deserve in getting us here. they need 'credit' for what they've done. they need to be named as bosses and brains of the GOP politicians and their lies and ignorance needs to be pointed out on  a regular basis. that happens in limited circles (some here) but it also needs to come from dem politicians and TV personalities and it needs to happen often. 'that's what limbaugh has been saying and it's a lie' should be a common retort in political confrontations in media. and fox needs to take a rightful lesser position in the left's media emphasis.

                to do that the dem party needs transcripts ( maybe using transcription software) of the main local and national talkers to document (with simple searches) the coordination and to be able to warn their candidates and legislators before hand. and especially at the state level be able to go to the media right after the state GOP pol goes on the local blowhard's show and lies about voter suppression or anti immigration legislation they want to pass, for instance. state GOP in my state is constantly showing up on the big limbaugh station to help the local blowhards swiftboat and lie about dems and their ideas. it works.

                but a lot of it would be moot if the left, especially uni student activists, got our universities out of RW radio. many of the major RW stations are heavily dependent on uni and college sports for community cred and bringing in advertisers. those stations are totally partisan and work 24/7 to undo the work of progressive organizations and those student activists. no uni has any excuse for supporting global warming denial, racism, and sexism like they do.

                in general i don't think it's about finding louder alternatives of being more competitive- they have the monopoly and that won't happen. the whole operation needs to be exposed and the discredited so media and politicians can't effortlessly and without shame continue to regurgitate their prechewed talking points and lies without having a RUSH tattoo on their foreheads. the same applies to the rabid talk radio base who convince apathetic less interested voters at election time.

                This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and GOP lies by broadcasting sports on over 170 Limbaugh radio stations.

                by certainot on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 06:35:56 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

  •  GOPspeak: 1) Having a plan means agreeing to GOP (0+ / 0-)

    plan 2) compromise means total capitulation to a Republican view.

    "They will not collect a ransom in exchange for not crashing the American economy. The full faith and credit of the United States of America is not a bargaining chip."

    by TofG on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:16:56 AM PST

  •  Thanks go to (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ferg
    In fact, their plan got 51 votes in the Senate last week, but thanks to the filibuster, (and Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Carl Levin......) Senate Republicans were able to block it.
    More wonderful fallout from the flaccid Democrats in the Senate.
  •  The only way for to GOP to support its arguments (0+ / 0-)

    is to lie.  Because even they are too ashamed to tell the truth out loud:  They are greedy bastards who hate the poor and non-Whites and want them to suffer.  Moreover, economists and political scientists are not the ones who can examine Republican motives because only anthropologists and psychiatrists have the expertise to do that job.

  •  Last time the White House gave a plan on an issue (0+ / 0-)

    Republicans had a sad. Damned if you do.

    Money doesn't talk it swears.

    by Coss on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:22:43 AM PST

  •  By this definition (0+ / 0-)

    Neither Paul Ryan or Simpson/Bowles had a plan.

  •  Standard verbal trick of the evasive politician. (0+ / 0-)

    Make a simple half right assertion. Repeat it as much as possible. If it's about an arcane fact, so much the better. (Like exactly when two bills were passed.)

    If/when the pol gets caught up with a simple, direct, unavoidable challenge, he redefines his term, as slightly as possible. (As in, a Plan that's worth something, and that means a plan that can pass.)

    When the next simple, direct, unavoidable challenge comes, Speaker Boehner will say something like: "The President says he wants bipartisanship. That means, a plan that will pass on a bipartisan basis." (What could be more simple than that?)

    These folks are really good at this stuff. Switch the terms, switch the actor, switch the subject. If necessary, deny the quote or the context ... and no one will remember!

    Even the best journalists sound like they're hounding a poor trapped elected official if they ask a second and third challenging follow up. And, except during press conferences where their "source" is trapped, open to view and many reporters are present, journalists do not want to jeopardize their relationship and access with an interviewee or his friends.

    So it's no surprise Boehner typically doesn't open the floor to questions after he parades his troops in and makes a statement, and only junior members of the press bother to attend.

    2014 IS COMING. Build up the Senate. Win back the House : 17 seats. Plus!

    by TRPChicago on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:31:05 AM PST

    •  And there's the problem with the press: (0+ / 0-)
      And, except during press conferences where their "source" is trapped, open to view and many reporters are present, journalists do not want to jeopardize their relationship and access with an interviewee or his friends.
      Journalism shouldn't be about maintaining access by pushing partisan screed, it should be about telling the facts, not drawing conclusions, and simply stating the case.

      This equal but fair bullcrap has to stop.  I understand the concept, I actually agree with the concept, but the practice merely leads to misinformation.  The concept is that both sides of any story should be examined.  Sure!  Sure they should.  But the verifiable facts of both sides of the story are what should be examined, not touting opinion (of either side of the aisle!) as fact.  That's called editorialism, and is morally reprehensible when it is presented to a trusting public as concrete fact.

      The media is only one of the perpetrators of this travesty, but it's a damned large one.

      I suddenly feel like Captain Ahab, with truly unbiased debate as my Moby Dick.  The great white whale of it all is, as long as corporations pay the media's bills, it'll never happen.  Spin, spin, spin, with American's lives the plates, but deny any culpability when you inevitably drop one, three, or all of them.

      "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

      by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:40:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You put your finger on the key word - "examined" (0+ / 0-)

        There is no examination. The Inside-the-Beltway political press is a He said/She said batch of reporters. Reporting means to them the fact of what was said, not challenging what was said. For challenges amount to opinion journalism, and that's not what reporters do. They just, well, report.

        2014 IS COMING. Build up the Senate. Win back the House : 17 seats. Plus!

        by TRPChicago on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:37:57 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Precicely my point, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TRPChicago

          and thank you for pointing that out.  There is no "journalism" in the Beltway gang.  There is only rumormongering, fearmongering, and other -mongerings that are too extensive to enumerate.

          Journalism usually comes from the small-town reporter who is examining, say, the allegations of police impropriety, or from small independant reporting agencies, such as these in my current place of residence:

          The Dallas Observer

          The Dallas Voice

          That's not to say that there isn't a bias or slant in the reporting, but these reporters (usually) have the audacity to come right out and say, "Hey, I don't like this.  Here's what happened.  Here's why I don't like it."  That's more fair and balanced than the he-said, she-said circle jerk of the Press Corps.

          "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

          by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:52:20 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Lying Liars 2 (0+ / 0-)

    Boehner is following the Romney campaign strategy of lying with total impunity, and then claiming unfair injury those few occasions when the press calls you on it.

  •  Isn't there a simple, one-syllable word (0+ / 0-)

    for a deliberate false claim?

    Ask me if I'm afraid. I say, "Of course not. I'm a fool, and fools never die."

    by Troubadour on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:35:41 AM PST

  •  plan has to pass one chamber to be worth anything? (0+ / 0-)

    What the fuck kind of nonsense is this?  A bill that passes one chamber of congress might as well be toilet paper.  Unless said bill is merely a political tool and not a governmental tool.

    Speaking of tools..."Speaker Boehner to the podium please...Speaker Boehner to the podium..."

    Big money got a mean streak...big money got no soul. - N. Peart

    by jsibley on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 09:48:40 AM PST

  •  Political Messaging by Goebbles 101 (0+ / 0-)

    Just keep repeating the lie, no matter how many times it's proven wrong.

    "The test of our progress is not whether we add to the abundance of those who have much. It is whether we provide enough to those who have little. " --Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by jg6544 on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:07:21 AM PST

  •  I love the photo at the beginning of the article. (0+ / 0-)

    Thought clouds:
    Blurry Boner: "I need a drink!"
    Vampire Cantor: "I vant to drink your blood!"

    "For we, the people, understand that our country cannot succeed when a shrinking few do very well and a growing many barely make it." - President Barack Obama, Second Inaugural Address, January 21, 2013.

    by surfermom on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:11:32 AM PST

  •  Can't Reid bring it up for a vote again? (0+ / 0-)

    Just in case Boehner forgot? I wouldn't want this misrepresented claim to be forgotten by the press or anyone else.

  •  Not that we expect consistency (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Subwoofer of the House

    But if the Republican plan cannot pass the Senate or get signed by the president, then by the reasoning (if we can use that word) of Boehner and his office, the plan does not exist.

    Thus, neither side has a plan.

    Which is both absurd and far more accurate than what Boehner is saying.

    Fact is, the Republicans are following the same playbook out of power that they used when they ran the government.

    Screw things up beyond belief, then shout, "See, the government doesn't work."  Ignore the fact that the only reason the government isn't working is that Republicans have arranged it so.

    Of course, when the media is as stupid as ours is, such a plan has no chance of running up against the reality of its own absurdity.

    Hurray.  Republicans are destroying the country.  In order to get elected.  And it's working.

    In Washington, whenever anyone does something wrong, everyone else gets punished.

    by Noziglia on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:41:48 AM PST

    •  Endgame. (0+ / 0-)

      What's the endgame here?  To decimate the country into some sort of dystopian hellhole?  Kids with motorcycles and football gear demanding tolls to drive/ride/walk on their road?  Chaos, anarchy, and otherwise subhuman living conditions with the exception of corporate enclaves?  Drowned-baby government?

      Do they not realize that this strategy only costs them a job as well, or are they duped by promises of remuneration when "The New Order" comes into play?

      Or am I a cynic?

      "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

      by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 10:54:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You're a realist (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bryduck, Subwoofer of the House

        The fact is, Ayn Rand distopias do exist.  There are countries in the world that follow her model exactly.

        And they are, in fact, the hellholes you describe.

        And Republicans have no idea, and never will.  And when they end up living in gated penthouses, living lives constrained by their own policies to going only places  that are behind walls, they will still have no idea what got us there.

        Because reality has a liberal bias, which means they will never pay attention to it.

        In Washington, whenever anyone does something wrong, everyone else gets punished.

        by Noziglia on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 11:03:39 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Fair point. (0+ / 0-)

          I would be interested in what countries you consider to be the hellholes I described.  Not to contradict you, nor to demand evidence of you, but to have access to that evidence to rebut the "Party Line."

          Preferably sources which indict the very policies we are discussing as a major contributing factor to the dystopic reality of these places.

          I realize common sense and Google would probably do that, but having made the point, it is incumbent upon you to support it.  That's my laziness excuse, anyway!

          ;)

          "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

          by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 11:07:39 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Somalia is exhibit A. n/t (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Subwoofer of the House

            "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

            by bryduck on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 11:39:33 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Damn (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Subwoofer of the House

            your laziness trumps mine.

            But, given my laziness, I warn you that I'm just making this shit up as I go along, and any real research is entirely accidental.

            Also, I add this caveat:  Unlike the evil Right Wing Nut Jobs, I do not view the world in black and white.  Things are not all one or all another.  Thus, there are degrees of Randness in the world, so some of my examples do have some degree of government, law, rationality, whatever.  But they're still in chaos.

            The real measure of Rand's "ideas" is that in these cases in which there is no government to provide roads, schools, justice, and other services, one looks in vain for the magic of the private sector to take up the slack.

            So . . .

            Somalia.  Sort of the poster child for a completely collapsed society.  Efforts are made to restore civil society here, but there is a reason this is the safe haven for the pirates that infest the seas in the area.

            Afghanistan.  As in most places in the world, there are no good choices.  The Saudi/Salafi/Wahabi so-called government that was run by what we call the Taliban was criminal and abysmal, but there is little evidence that what we call the central government now actually controls anything.  This is a whole in the political map of the world, where the only identity is tribes.  One measure of the weakness of our political ideas in this part of the world is that the borders drawn on our maps mean nothing; Waziristan and other parts of Pakistan are no different from what we call Afghanistan.

            Russia.  Yes, we can point to something and call it a government.  But much of the economy, the laws, and a lot else are run by what can only be described as criminal gangs.  This awful condition, it should be noted, is a direct outcome of turning the country over to the Chicago School of Economics.

            There are others, but I want to fall back on making an abstract point:  Just as in the fantasy novels, "freedom" is pretty much a matter of doing what the leaders tell you to.  Because the leaders are blessed with certainty, and have all the answers, independent thought is actively discouraged.  Thus, we can make the case that totalitarianism (Myanmar, Syria, Saudi Arabia, North Sudan) is as Randian as is complete collapse and chaos.

            And just what, one asks, is attractive about this idea???

            In Washington, whenever anyone does something wrong, everyone else gets punished.

            by Noziglia on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 11:55:00 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Power (0+ / 0-)

              Power is what's attractive about this idea.  Hence my question concerning the dupery of the proletariat in regards to their comeuppance by the new order.

              Look, we all know evil feeds upon itself.  Witness Hitler and how he repaid French sympathizers.  Why did they do it?  Why did members of the opposition party in the CCCP capitulate to Stalin?  Why do they still capitulate to the Party?  It's all about remuneration.  Remember, Stalin's first major domestic act after rising to power was to initiate his pogroms.

              So, the question becomes, what makes them think they're special enough to defy these odds?

              Is it sheer egomania?  Is it more?

              "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

              by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 12:15:03 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Now you're getting too profound (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Subwoofer of the House

                for the Internet . . . .

                But you are right to compare our current situation to known examples in history.

                I am a committed follower of Socrates, in that I consider myself smarter than the other guy because, unlike him, I know I don't have all the answers.

                But my own reaction to your question is partly ego, partly ignorance.

                Many people are not making the connections between conditions and circumstances in other places and times, and their vision for their own lives and our own society.  When the answers to some of the problems we face are too complex to fit on a bumper sticker, they just cannot recognize them.

                When you are trying to argue with people whose slogan is "keep the government's hands off my Medicare," you already know you have a problem . . .  (Your sig line tells me you know this already.)

                In part, it's also still bigotry, though that is too simple a way to put it.  Some people just need someone, anyone, to feel superior to.  Hell, we all do, only for you and me, it's easier (lol).  For many of these people, they just believe that in a fair competition, they will win, because they are better.  Just because there is no connection between any part of that idea and reality, is not enough to change their minds.

                There's more to it, of course.  My own frustration is the woeful lack of understanding, and ability to justify our ideas, that the politicians and pundits supposedly on our side constantly exhibit.  Even the non-reality-challanged who aren't just mainlining Fox Noise don't get any real alternative other than "be nice" from the average Liberal spokesperson.

                And that's way more than this lazy blogger can get into just now . . .

                In Washington, whenever anyone does something wrong, everyone else gets punished.

                by Noziglia on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 12:30:43 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Marry me. (0+ / 0-)

                  Seriously, I don't care if you're a guy, a girl, a potted plant, or a cat, marry me.

                  That was a wonderfully written response, and I sincerely thank you for it.  You bring up many cogent points (which, contrary to Sheldon Cooper, I do not reject categorically) which deserve a deeper discussion in a more appropriate venue than derailing this diary.

                  Since I'm still a diary virgin, and have a couple of ideas on my stove, I'll have to add this one.  Cognitive dissonance is alive and well, and it deserves to be revealed, castigated, and banished much more than many thorny issues of the day, since if we can exorcize that daemon, many of the other hot topics will simply be starved of support, wither up, and die.

                  Again, thank you.  This post brightened my day.

                  "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

                  by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 12:41:55 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I'm blushing (0+ / 0-)

                    and if I weren't already married (and not Mormon) or knew what YOU were, I'd be tempted.

                    Thanks for the the vote of confidence, and keep engaged.

                    Politically, that is . . .

                    In Washington, whenever anyone does something wrong, everyone else gets punished.

                    by Noziglia on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 01:39:27 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Hahaha (0+ / 0-)

                      I'm a guy, a gay guy at that, and you're a Mormon?

                      My ex is Mormon, where I was a practicing Jew.  You can imagine the disconnect that created...

                      "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

                      by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 01:48:48 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Wait, I'm insane... (0+ / 0-)

                        divorce insanity.  You're saying you're not Mormon, because, you know, polygamy.  Sorry.  The meeting I just got out of caused some massive brain drain.  I may have to write a diary concerning the sequester and the non-profit I work for.

                        /sigh

                        "Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience every time." --Unknown

                        by Subwoofer of the House on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 01:56:14 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

      •  "Yes" to your various questions. (0+ / 0-)

        Except for the costing them jobs. They are already on the other side of the rich/poor divide, and the rich always do well, even in dystopias. They can always leave theirs.

        "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

        by bryduck on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 11:41:49 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  The Hope is. (0+ / 0-)

    The hope is that if we progressives point out the ridiculous and false statements Rep. Boehner makes on a regular basis, hopefully the voters in his district will relieve him of his job. For the pain that will be coming from the sequester will affect his district as well.

  •  when ISN'T bohner lying? (0+ / 0-)

    when I see a republican on tv, I always think of Monty Python: "Shut your festering gob you tit! Your type makes me puke!"

    by bunsk on Tue Mar 05, 2013 at 05:38:12 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site