21 votes

The House GOP revolts: John Boehner officially has no control over his caucus

The speaker suffers another embarrassing defeat at the hands of his own party

In a stinging blow to Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), the House on Thursday voted down a five-year farm bill, with 62 Republicans siding against the party leadership and voting no.

By a vote of 234 to 195, the House defeated the measure, largely over objections to proposed cuts to food stamps. Democrats decried those cuts as too deep, while conservative Republicans who joined them said those cuts should have been much deeper.

The embarrassing defeat for Boehner comes one year after he opted to not even bring the massive, $940 billion measure to the floor for a vote because of Republican objections. The bill was thought to have had more bipartisan support this time around, and its defeat came as a surprise.

http://news.yahoo.com/house-gop-revolts-john-boehner-officia...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
SteveMT's picture

Remember: "All those in favor say Aye."

"All those opposed say NO."
"The Ayes have it."

Those words will live in infamy. He will be shedding his alligator tears soon. Boehner (actual pronunciation) has become a flaccid Speaker.

It's enough to make a grown man cry

Boo-Hoo Boehner

One of the reasons

politicians do not like bringing shit to a vote are the headlines above. It is unreasonable for those who subscribe to political solutions to brow beat politicians for merely introducing legislation to vote on if you are also bitching about any notion there ought to be public debates on issues.

What is the story here? Boehner? Give me a break ...

so...

your assumption is that the two are mutually exclusive:
You can't 'brow beat' politicians for 'introducing'(often SNEAKING IN) BAD BILLS..
and
at the same time be FOR pubic debate on issues.
hmmmm...
that presumes:
The ONLY way to HAVE public debate is:
by introducing legislation.
Nope.
I need ONLY point to the RAGING public debates that were NOT 'triggered' by ANY bill or Congress person: take your pick
NSA/Snowden
IRS teaparty
there's 2... need more?

I am not assuming

the two are mutually exclusive because I qualified my assertion with "it is unreasonable for those who subscribe to political solutions ..."

I am only asserting if you are not apolitical and subscribe to the legislative process as a necessary evil of minarchy then it is irrelevant who introduces a bill whether said bill is good or bad. To believe in a legislative process means there are going to be good and bad bills introduced.

To put this in further context ...

Did you appreciate it when Ron Paul was demonized for introducing kooky legislation?

Ron Paul might say focus on issues not individuals ...

Good, I hate it when he is in

Good, I hate it when he is in control

https://twitter.com/StonewallDP

Support these Liberty Candidates and find and add more !
http://www.dailypaul.com/287246/2014-liberty-candidate-thread

2016 Presidential Candidates Exposed!
http://www.dailypaul.com/307360/2016-potential-president

Boner lost control of his

Boner lost control of his cockus?

Isn't this part of Dr. Paul's educational classes?

I call it a "class" every time Ron Paul speaks, because he's really schooling us all on what LIBERTY and a Constitutional Republic is all about!! In this instance, the vote wasn't along party lines. To me, it NEVER should be!!! The vote should be for or against the idea or principle of the bill or law or whatever.
What I want to know is, WHERE are the voices in Congress screaming that there shouldn't be ANY food stamps in the first place!!!???

------------------
BC
Silence isn't always golden....sometimes it's yellow.

"The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." - Patrick Henry

Ha, ha. Winning...

"Many pundits pointed to the defeat as further evidence that Boehner is a singularly ineffective speaker who cannot control the far right wing of his caucus. "House Republicans simply cannot be led by anyone at the moment," the Washington Post's Chris Cillizza observed."

How can he "officially" have lost control?

Did his caucus present him with some "official" document or make an "official" statement that states he "no longer has control over them"?

I hate when people incorrectly throw in words that have specific meanings to try to exaggerate or emphasize their claim. "Officially" is really common and two others that come to mind are "literally" and "statistically".

"Literally" is the worst. When people say the word "literally", it's almost guaranteed that they mean the exact opposite of "literally".

My other pet peeve is "actually."

I don't know who the moron is that started using all of these words in the wrong places, but it seems they have company because their stupidity is contagious.

"Decimate"

"Decimate" means to murder 1 out of 10 people, thusly: line them up, have them count off, kill every tenth person. The Romans used to do it to POWS and slaves.

Whenever I hear it applied to cities and buildings, I cringe. The above is so vivid, I don't think it should be applied to mere explosions.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/

I literally hate illiteracy.

I literally hate illiteracy. ;)

meekandmild's picture

My opinion

He is not a leader. "We the people" are the Leader and employer of our representatives. they are suppose to do the bidding of the people of their district, Not some other Representative with a title that has disillusions of grandeur.

Was that the Farm bill that

They were sneaking Monsanto frankenstien seeds and food into subsidisies.

sovereign