Tag Archives: House GOP

Uncategorized

Surprise! Most GOPers favor impeachment

4 Comments

A part of me is glad the talk of impeaching President Obama keeps percolating.

It serves to remind much of the country that today’s Republican Party is being dominated by nutty zealots who would impeach the president for passing gas in a public elevator if they thought they could get away with it.

Poll: 35 percent say impeachment justified

A new poll shows that 68 percent of Americans who call themselves Republicans believe Obama has done something merit impeachment by the House of Representatives. The poll, sponsored by YouGov and the Huffington Post, reports that 8 percent of Democrats think it’s a bad idea.

Wow. I’m shocked, shocked!

Reasonable Republicans — and there remain some of them in high public office — think otherwise about impeachment. House Speaker John Boehner says it won’t happen. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte of Virginia says the president hasn’t committed the type of crime that merits impeachment.

That hasn’t stopped the likes of former half-term Alaska Gov. Sarah “Barracuda” Palin from weighing in with impeachment talk.

I rather like Attorney General Eric Holder’s response to Palin’s recent demand for an impeachment. He quipped that the former Alaska governor “wasn’t a particularly good vice presidential candidate.” Holder said Palin was “an even worse judge of who ought to be impeached and why.”

I figure that as long as the media keep reporting this impeachment nonsense, the better it is for those who oppose the idea of proceeding with such idiocy. It exposes the modern GOP as a party dominated by fruitcakes who, absent any constructive agenda for governing, are left to talk openly about an issue intended solely to stoke its fire-breathing base.

Uncategorized

Tax cut … with no spending offsets?

I’ll have to admit that I’m a little slow on the uptake at times.

Folks have to explain some things to me on occasion to help me make sense of trends and decisions.

This decision by the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives falls into that head-scratching category.

http://www.kxly.com/news/politics/house-republicans-vote-for-business-tax-cut/26906060

The House has approved a $287 billion business tax cut. It hasn’t included any spending offsets to pay for it. Speaker John Boehner boasts that the House is working to create jobs. Maybe it will. Then again, maybe those businesses benefiting from the tax cuts will take that money straight to the bottom line. That’s been happening quite a bit lately, you know?

What’s got me puzzled is why the House GOP keeps insisting on spending offsets whenever the Obama administration proposes job creation ideas. Infrastructure spending? Can’t afford it unless we cut spending in other places.

Another thing needs noting. The deficit is coming down in rather dramatic fashion. A tax cut of the size just approved by the House is going to blow up the deficit yet again.

My memory isn’t perfect, but I do remember a time when Republicans belonged to the party of “fiscal responsibility.” They loathed deficits, while Democrats blew them off. Ronald Reagan was elected president in 1980 partly because President Carter and Congress ran deficits of a whopping $40 billion annually; there was some other stuff also that contributed to Carter’s defeat.

Memory also reminds me of how quick congressional Republicans were to share in the credit for the balanced budget and the surpluses run up during the final years of Bill Clinton’s presidency. They made sure we all knew that their spending restraints were more responsible for the surplus than the modest tax increases proposed by the president — and, oh yes, approved by Congress.

The new age of Republicanism, though, sees the party in control of one half of one branch of government talking out of both sides of its mouth.

Spending offsets only count when the other guys want to do something. Tax cuts for business? Who cares?

In the meantime, President Obama is asking for $3.7 billion in emergency spending to help deal with that crisis along our southern border. The GOP response? It costs too much money.

Go figure.

Uncategorized

Boehner lawsuit comes into focus

2 Comments

So, now we know the basis for Speaker John Boehner’s desire to sue the president of the United States.

He is angry because the president unilaterally postponed the employer mandate provisions of the Affordable Care Act, which Republicans want to eliminate altogether, but they’re mad because they didn’t the chance to do it.

I believe that’s what I heard Boehner say today.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/211912-boehner-to-sue-over-obamacare-delay

It’s not that Barack Obama has used executive authority excessively. He hasn’t. Boehner wants to sue the president because of a single act that he had the authority to perform as chief executive of the United States of America.

This foolishness is going to proceed while:

* Veterans health care issues remain unresolved.

* Highway infrastructure plans remain unattended.

* Immigration reform is stuck in the mud.

* The president’s $3.7 billion request for emergency spending on the border crisis remains in limbo.

I’m sure I’m missing some other issues, but you get my drift.

Instead, the speaker of the House wants to ask for permission from his colleagues to sue the president because of action he took that seeks to give employers some flexibility in following through on the ACA.

This is baffling in the extreme.

Here is what former White House press secretary Jay Carney said: “The ability to postpone the deadline is clear,” Carney said. He urged reporters to “read the Federal Register,” the official docket for federal regulations, to survey similar examples of delays.

“The fact of the matter is this is not unusual, and it is evidence of the kind of flexibility and deference to the concerns and interests of, in this case, a small percentage of American businesses with more than 50 employees that you would think Republicans would support,” Carney said.

I concur with Barack Obama’s assertion that Congress wants to sue him for doing his job while the legislative branch dawdles.

Uncategorized

Why not act on your own, Mr. President?

Texas Gov. Rick Perry reportedly posed an interesting notion to President Obama when the men met this week in Dallas to discuss the illegal immigrant/refugee border crisis on the Texas border with Mexico.

Why not take action on your own, Mr. President? Perry asked.

Interesting, yes? Obama said he responded that such executive decisiveness has produced the real threat of a lawsuit by House Speaker John Boehner, who contends Obama does too much of that kind of thing already.

No can do, governor.

Obama is pushing Congress now to act on his request for a $3.7 billion emergency spending bill to deal with the crisis that involves the flood of young immigrants coming into the United States from Central America. Congress insists the president do something about it. He has asked Congress to give him the money to do what it asks. It’s now up to Congress to, um, do what it has insisted on doing all along.

Can the president act alone? I suppose there are ways he can do a little of this and that administratively.

It’s interesting nonetheless that Gov. Perry would have made such a suggestion at a time when his Republican colleagues in Congress are considering legal action to prevent that very thing.

The ball has been kicked back to Congress. What are you going to do with it, ladies and gentlemen?

Uncategorized

Impeachment talk makes me crazy

All this impeachment poppycock is making me nuts.

Some goofball right-wing members of Congress — not to mention a few bystanders perched in the political peanut gallery — are saying the House of Representatives needs to impeach President Barack Obama.

For what, you say? I don’t know exactly. For issuing executive orders in keeping with his constitutional authority? For the flood of illegal immigrants who are coming into the country, as if the president himself could order it stopped? For tweaking the Affordable Care Act after it became law?

The right-wing loons contend he’s broken laws. They haven’t cited specific laws — because he hasn’t broken any law.

Many of us have lived through two impeachable events involving presidents.

* The first one occurred in the early 1970s. President Nixon’s re-election campaign hired a team of goons to break into the Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate office complex. When word got out that they were captured, Nixon then ordered the FBI to block the investigation. Then that became known and all hell broke loose.

The House Judiciary Committee and a select committee of senators conducted hearings. The Judiciary Committee then approved articles of impeachment. Nixon resigned in August 1974 rather than face certain impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate.

* Then came the episode involving President Clinton. A special prosecutor was hired by Congress to examine the Whitewater real estate dealings allegedly involving President and Mrs. Clinton. The prosecutor then began snooping around allegations that Clinton fooled around with a young White House intern. A federal grand jury asked Clinton about it. He lied when he denied any involvement with the woman. Oops. You can’t perjure yourself. The House impeached him on those grounds, but the Senate acquitted him.

Two specific incidents resulted in a near impeachment and the real thing.

The stuff involving President Obama? It’s all political hucksterism, meant to inflame the Republican base, get ’em riled up.

Sure, the president has made mistakes. Has any president skated through office without blundering here and there? Of course not.

Do these blunders require an impeachment? No.

To his credit, House Speaker John Boehner says he disagrees with the impeachment yammering.

Good. Now he needs to take the tea party yahoos within his caucus who keep fomenting this nonsense to the woodshed.

Uncategorized

Obama to GOP: Pass the supplemental

Here is where we stand on the border crisis erupting in Texas and elsewhere on the southern border.

President Barack Obama has met with Texas Gov. Rick Perry to discuss ways to solve the problem. Obama asked Congress for $3.7 billion in supplemental aid to provide greater border security and enhance detention and repatriation efforts. The president and the governor have reached broad agreement on what to do. The next move now belongs to Congress.

Will it approve the request or will it stall?

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/barack-obama-texas-immigration-108738.html?hp=t1_3

The president has called Congress out and asked lawmakers to do as he has asked and as they have insisted. Gov. Perry agrees with him — in what might one of the rarest political alignments in recent memory.

So get it done.

The president and the governor had what Obama called a “constructive” meeting. That’s a start. It’s good the men had a chance to talk things over and to settle on areas of agreement.

The border crisis didn’t just erupt overnight. It’s been years in the making. Obama now wants Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform, which includes more border officers, greater enforcement tools, and streamlining of wait times for immigrants to have their cases resolved.

Politics, of course, gets in the way of everything.

First things first. The supplemental request needs to become law. Send it to the Oval Office and let the president sign it. Now.

Uncategorized

Impeachment talk is ridiculous

Put a sock in it, Sarah “Barracuda” Palin.

You too, U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Loony Bin. Same for the rest of the clowns on the far right wing of the Republican Party who believe Barack Obama has committed an impeachable offense.

At least one leading Republican, the speaker of the House of Representatives, is sounding a note of sanity.

Boehner says no to impeachment

John Boehner knows better. He was there when the House commenced impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton and then watched as Republicans took it on the chin in the 1998 mid-term election.

Palin, the ex-half-term Alaska governor, says Obama should be impeached because of the immigration crisis on our southern border. Someone needs to ask the former GOP vice-presidential nominee: What “high crime” and “misdemeanor” has the president committed?

I think I know the answer: none.

She wrote in an op-ed: “The many impeachable offenses of Barack Obama can no longer be ignored. If after all this he’s not impeachable, then no one is.”

Let’s allow the grownups to run the country. Speaker Boehner said simply to the impeachment calls, “I disagree.”

Enough said.

Uncategorized

Obama, Perry to meet after all

It appears saner heads are beginning to prevail in the Texas governor’s office and at the White House.

President Obama has asked Congress for $4 billion in emergency aid to help combat the flow of illegal immigrants into Texas and other border states.

And …

Gov. Rick Perry has accepted the president’s invitation to a private meeting between the men to discuss ways to solve the crisis on the border.

Is this a sign of progress? Could be.

Perry had refused to take part in an airport tarmac symbolic handshake when Obama arrives in Austin later this week. He wanted a private meeting and said so publicly. The White House agreed this morning.

A meeting between the president and the governor won’t solve the crisis by itself. It is good political symbolism, and provides good “optics” for both men. One more such positive optic would be for the president to visit the border to see up close what’s causing all the ruckus.

As for the 4 billion bucks the president is asking, the ball is now in Congress’s court.

Congressional Republicans — to no one’s surprise — have been bashing the White House over its response to the border crisis that has produced more than 50,000 illegal immigrants coming to Texas in recent weeks. They’re mostly unaccompanied children and young adults.

The president would use the money to beef up security on the border, which as I understand it, is what the GOP is demanding.

So here you go, GOP leaders of Congress. Will you approve the money or will you drag your feet to preserve the political talking points?

Uncategorized

To what end, Mr. Speaker?

U.S. House Speaker John Boehner is “frustrated.” He acknowledges that President Obama is frustrated and so are “the American people” frustrated with the lack of cohesion in our federal government.

The speaker’s remedy? He says he wants to sue the president for exercising his executive authority.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/john-boehner-obama-so-sue-me-reaction-constitution-108601.html?hp=f1

I can barely contain my disdain for this nonsense.

Boehner wrote an op-ed for CNN.com in which he said Obama has failed to “faithfully execute” his office under the Constitution. Why didn’t he gripe when President Bush was issuing executive orders at a greater clip than his successor has done?

I have this sense that the president has hurt the speaker’s feelings with his quips from various podiums in recent weeks. “So sue me,” was his latest barb, in which he said he wouldn’t apologize for doing things using his constitutionally granted authority allows him to do.

Boehner says Obama is circumventing the legislative process and is stripping Congress of its own authority.

In a fascinating twist, though, one of the speaker’s own allies — Erick Erickson, of Redstate.com — writes in another commentary that Boehner is engaging in “political theater.”

He has no end game, Erickson writes, adding that there’s nothing to be gained from this wasteful exercise.

“I realize John Boehner and the House Republicans may lack the testicular fortitude to fight President Obama,” he wrote, “but I would kindly ask that he save the taxpayers further money on a political stunt solely designed to incite Republican voters.”

“John Boehner’s lawsuit is nothing more than political theater and a further Republican waste of taxpayer dollars,” Erickson said.

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

Uncategorized

IRS controversy lives on … and on

The Internal Revenue Service controversy hasn’t yet blown up into a full-scale scandal, no matter how hard the right wing tries to make it so.

Now the talking heads and pols on the right are clamoring for a special counsel to investigate the matter. Recall, now, that it began with revelations that the IRS was vetting conservative political action groups’ requests for tax-exempt status. It does the same thing for liberal groups, too, but the conservative chattering class got all wound up over it and have raised a stink ever since.

Now there’s been further revelations about two years worth of emails that went missing from IRS honcho Lois Lerner’s computer. What the heck happened to them?

Republicans, not surprisingly, are trying to tie the IRS matter to the White House, even though no evidence has been uncovered that the IRS was doing anything under White House orders. They want to implicate the president — naturally! — for all this. So far they’ve come up empty.

A special prosecutor might be a good idea if Congress could limit the scope of his or her probe. The last notable special prosecutor hired was one Kenneth Starr, who was brought in to investigate the Whitewater real estate dealings involving President and Mrs. Clinton. Starr, though, went rogue and discovered the president had engaged in a tawdry relationship with a young White House intern.

The House of Reps impeached him because he lied to a federal grand jury about that relationship; the Senate acquitted the president at trial.

Is a special prosecutor needed in this case? I believe the GOP-led House of Representatives has looked thoroughly into this matter and has found zero evidence of White House complicity in anything involving the IRS.

That, of course, will not end the clamor.