Boehner: Senate Dems should 'get off their ass'

[xfire]

Premium Link Upgrade

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) offered a blunt message for Senate Democrats in the standoff over Homeland Security funding, urging them to “get off their ass” and pass a bill.

(more at the link)

After six years of senate GOP ass dragging?!?

Premium Media Content

Upgrade to Premium to view all images in this thread

Upgrade to Premium

 

[xfire]

Premium Link Upgrade

Frustrated Republicans taste limits of majority control

WASHINGTON (AP) — Congressional Republicans returned to their districts for a weeklong recess Friday no closer to a solution to keeping the Homeland Security Department funded past this month. And many were beginning to fear they'd have little to show from a standoff with minority Senate Democrats and President Barack Obama over immigration policy.

Indeed, a month after assuming control of the Senate as well as the House, Republicans are finding, to their chagrin, that important things haven't changed.

"I suppose elections have consequences, except in the United States Senate," complained GOP Rep. Mick Mulvaney of South Carolina, who like many House Republicans hoped for more after the party assumed full control of Congress.

"Tell me how it would be different if Harry Reid were still running the place," Mulvaney added, naming the Senate Democratic leader who was booted into the minority in November's midterm elections.

Their party is now setting the floor schedule and calling hearings, but Republicans are six votes short of the 60 needed to advance most legislation, and Senate rules grant numerous rights to the minority party. That means if Democrats remain united, they have the ability to block GOP bills just as they did while in the majority.

And Democrats have been united against House-****** legislation funding the Homeland Security Department through September, the end of the budget year, while also rolling back Obama's executive policies on immigration.

As a result, Congress appears to be at a stalemate on the issue, leaving Republicans with only a few options: Pass a short-term extension of current funding levels, fold and strip the immigration language opposed by Democrats from the bill, or let the Homeland Security Department run out of money when current funding expires Feb. 27.

They're all bad options from the GOP perspective. A short-term extension just pushes the problem to a later date. Removing the immigration language would amount to a bitter admission of defeat after Republicans have spent months accusing Obama of an unconstitutional power grab for limiting deportations for millions in the U.S. illegally and making them eligible for work permits. That's left Republicans staring down the third possibility: a shutdown of the Homeland Security Department.

It's something most say they want to avoid, but on Thursday House Speaker John Boehner refused to rule the possibility out, insisting instead that Senate Democrats should get the blame if it happens.

"If funding for Homeland Security lapses, Washington Democrats are going to bear the responsibility," the Ohio Republican said. "The House has done its job. We've spoken. And now it's up to the Senate to do their job."

Some House conservatives go further, arguing that a shutdown would hardly be calamitous because the large majority of department personnel would be deemed essential and report to work, though most would not get paid until after the shutdown ends.

"Look at the last shutdown — 85 to 90 percent of the personnel from DHS all came to work, and they all got paid" eventually, said Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz. "As much as both sides don't want that to happen, it is always a possibility."

The last shutdown happened in the fall of 2013 over a failed GOP attempt to uproot Obama's health care law. Republicans got blamed for that one, and some fear they would pay the political price if there's another one, too.

The dispute will resume when lawmakers return to the Capitol Feb. 23 with just a few days left before the funding deadline expires. GOP leaders have announced that the Senate will start the week by taking its fourth procedural vote on the House-****** funding bill. Democrats blocked all three previous attempts to open debate on the measure, and the outcome is unlikely to be any different the fourth time around.

The Capitol Hill drama is unfolding as the Obama administration moves forward unchecked in implementing the new immigration programs. Wednesday will bring the first major opportunity to sign up, when the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services begins accepting applications from those eligible for an expanded program granting work permits and deportation deferrals to immigrants brought illegally to the U.S. as ****. The Congressional Hispanic Caucus held a press conference Friday to encourage immigrants to enroll regardless of the political opposition, with members saying that will only make it harder for divided Republicans to undo the program.

"We're going to sign 'em up by the hundreds of thousands," predicted Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill. "The more people that are in the program, the harder it is to turn back the clock on justice."

Premium Link Upgrade

 

[Jagger69]

More inaction from our worthless legislative branch only now the shoe is on the other foot and the dems are the obstructionists. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. :hairpull:

 

[xfire]

More inaction from our worthless legislative branch only now the shoe is on the other foot and the dems are the obstructionists. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. :hairpull:

Hearing the republicans howl after six years of doing the same is magically delicious.

Premium Link Upgrade

House Republicans demand McConnell go nuclear on filibuster

House Republicans have demonstrated once again that they're better at politics than at strategy, or even understanding how the body they work in actually works. The growing spat between House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is turning into a bigger fight, with a bunch of House members demanding McConnell nuke the filibuster.

"If we're going to allow seven Democratic senators to decide what the agenda is of the House Republican conference, of the Senate Republican majority, then we might as well just give them the chairmanships, give them the leadership of the Senate," Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho) said at an event held with the Heritage Foundation.

He and other conservatives called for Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) to gut the Senate’s filibuster if necessary to move the House bill to President Obama. With Democrats objecting to the immigration language, Republicans in the Senate are far short of the 60 votes needed to overcome procedural hurdles.

Senate Republicans quickly fired back at Labrador, arguing the suggestion was unrealistic.

"We should change 200 years of precedent?" Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, told The Hill. "No. If you change it for one issue, then you change it forever."​

Yeah, not really 200 years, since the 60-vote majority rule was adopted in 1975, but you wouldn't expect a senator in leadership to actually know the history of the Senate, at least not a Republican one. It's the same myth they used to fight filibuster reform when they were in the minority. Back then it was to save their ability to obstruct everything President Obama wanted, mostly. But now there are some strategic issues they're grappling with that the peabrains in the House can't quite fathom.

Like the fact that there's still a Democratic president with a veto pen. The yahoos in the House Republican caucus still seem to be operating under the premise that they can make stuff happen just by having temper tantrums, not realizing that it only works with Boehner. What would be the point of McConnell completely reversing himself on the filibuster (and proving how craven he's been on the issue) if anything he passes will just be vetoed? No, it makes much more sense for him to wait until 2017, and if he still has the majority and a Republican is in the White House, overcome his principles then on the grounds that the Democrats are preventing the country from moving forward. Then he would have a much better chance of convincing 51 of his fellow Republicans to pull the trigger. Right now, so many of them raised holy hell over Reid's reforms on nominations, he'd be hard-pressed to find 51 willing to make themselves look like massive hypocrites.

For now, he gets to share Boehner's long-standing headache of a House Republican caucus clamoring for him to commit political suicide. Couldn't have happened to a more worthy guy.

Yeah, they can suck it. :1orglaugh

 

[MustBeGood]

The reason why political parties should be outlawed and everyone running for federal & state office should be independent.

 

[ThatRedWing]

What is the incentive to do anything? There is no job security in that. To get anything meaningful done there has to be some kind of compromise and in modern politics that is an evil word. There is always somebody back in their district that wants that job and will use that as an example of that Senator "flip-flopping". Any time that a politician says that "jobs are my main priority" it's political jargon for "all I care about is keeping my job". It doesn't matter which party you are in, if you lose your base then you are not going to get re-elected.

 

[Rattrap]

More inaction from our worthless legislative branch only now the shoe is on the other foot and the dems are the obstructionists. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. :hairpull:

Frustrating, no? And yet when I argue that Premium Link Upgrade , the response is either knee-jerk partisanship, "Hey look cats", or arguments that no, as a matter of fact, the current bosses are best for us.

The times they are a-(unfortunately not)-changin'.

 

[knowone]

The reason why political parties should be outlawed and everyone running for federal & state office should be independent.

That doesn't fix anything and probably makes it worse. San Jose has non-partisan government as well as most of the rest of Santa Clara Co (Silicon Valley). It's still back and forth between competing business interests. We still have corruption and scandals but there's just no party name attached to them. If you get rid of parties it gives more power to corporations. No one has a chance at getting elected without a sugar ***** company/billionaire. Nobody would be independent.

 

[D-rock]

Politicians only have two functions they do: ass dragging and fulfilling their self interest or sometimes the interest of people that give them a lot of money. It certainly isn't to help you out. (Unless you are one of said money givers)

 

[MustBeGood]

That doesn't fix anything and probably makes it worse. San Jose has non-partisan government as well as most of the rest of Santa Clara Co (Silicon Valley). It's still back and forth between competing business interests. We still have corruption and scandals but there's just no party name attached to them. If you get rid of parties it gives more power to corporations. No one has a chance at getting elected without a sugar ***** company/billionaire. Nobody would be independent.

Politicians only have two functions they do: ass dragging and fulfilling their self interest or sometimes the interest of people that give them a lot of money. It certainly isn't to help you out. (Unless you are one of said money givers)

Reason why political contributions should be outlawed also. Federal and state.

Take the Kochsucker Bros. They are trying to flip dominate blue states even though they are not residents like they are doing with this corporate whore Scott Walker.

C-SPAN can be used for candidates to speak their views without the strings attached from the money giver.
r