Boehner in Hot Seat as Move to Replace Him Gains Momentum

[steveox]

House Speaker John Boehner has found himself in the hot seat following the failure of his “Plan B” to avoid the fiscal cliff. And now all eyes are on whether the Ohio Republican can survive as speaker when a vote is taken in the House in the New Year.

It could potentially take as few as 17 Republicans to vote against him for him to lose the post, and with it the leadership of the House GOP that he has held for five years.

Several House Republicans are considering a plan to unseat Boehner, Breitbart reported Friday, and have compiled a detailed plan to accomplish that goal when the speaker of the 113th House is elected on Jan. 3. The representatives, who were not identified because they feared retaliation against them, say they want to elect the next speaker by secret ballot, rather than by roll call.


http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Bo.../2012/12/22/id/468812?s=al&promo_code=1145E-1

Why dont democrats to the same to Harry Reid? Hes doing a bad job! Why dont Democrats replace Harry Reid with Evan Bayh?

 

[Hobo1]

That's gossip, with unnamed members of the house who support the idea, and some reference I never have heard of. News media manufactured news.

I know some members of the house didn't like "Plan B". Here was Boehner's plan and I think it was clever. He knew Plan B would never pass the Senate. But at least the Republicans could go home for Christmas saying "See, we tried to compromise, but the Dems want it all their way."

I think Boehner did a darn good job overall. A newly elected President is a hard person to negotiate against.

The term "financial cliff" was a buzz word promoted by the media. In reality more like a bump in the financial road. Taxes will return to the Clinton era rates, and we will get a nice, cut out of a small percent of the fat, overblown federal budget.

 

[dogtowner]

That's gossip, with unnamed members of the house who support the idea, and some reference I never have heard of. News media manufactured news.

I know some members of the house didn't like "Plan B". Here was Boehner's plan and I think it was clever. He knew Plan B would never pass the Senate. But at least the Republicans could go home for Christmas saying "See, we tried to compromise, but the Dems want it all their way."

I think Boehner did a darn good job overall. A newly elected President is a hard person to negotiate against.

The term "financial cliff" was a buzz word promoted by the media. In reality more like a bump in the financial road. Taxes will return to the Clinton era rates, and we will get a nice, cut out of a small percent of the fat, overblown federal budget.

you are neglecting AMT. as well as the irony of a largw increase on the middle class bo claims to wish to defend.

AMT is big.

 

[Hobo1]

Overall, the Clinton era tax code hurts the rich much more than the middle class. Originally, the ATM was to stop rich people from not paying taxes by using massive deductions. Now inflation has allowed the ATM limit to reach down to the middle class.

We have a whole year to make changes to the Clinton era taxes before people must pay taxes again. I am sure both sides would quickly agree to fix or eliminate the ATM. Actually, if it were pegged to inflation, it's not such a bad idea.

I payed it years ago when I sold a rental house for a large capital gains. Coupled with my income, it put me over the ATM limit ($200,000???) and I had to pay an extra $10k in taxes. So I have no love for ATM. But that problem can be fixed, and if we don't do something quick about the federal debt, a lot of people won't have to worry about the ATM because they don't have a job!

 

[Cruella]

We have a whole year to make changes to the Clinton era taxes before people must pay taxes again.

Most middle class will feel it right away as a tax deduction from their first paychecks.

 

[Hobo1]

Most middle class will feel it right away as a tax deduction from their first paychecks.

That's true - for salaries. But in the case of the Alternative Minimum Tax, you figure that into your taxes when you file your tax return.

Allowing the Bush Tax Cuts to expire will hurt all people who must pay taxes. That's painful to middle class, but far more painful to the higher income brackets. Unfortunately, ever since Bush went on his cut taxes/ spending spree -- and continued by Obama -- this country is on the brink of bankruptcy. Congress and Obama are deadlocked over what to do to fix it. Everybody voted for the elected officials who got us into this mess, so it seems fair that all voters feel the pain to fix our national debt.

Maybe we can learn something about presidents with great ideas like neo-conservative and government health care. DON'T ELECT AND RE-ELECT THEM!

 

[dogtowner]

That's true - for salaries. But in the case of the Alternative Minimum Tax, you figure that into your taxes when you file your tax return.

Allowing the Bush Tax Cuts to expire will hurt all people who must pay taxes. That's painful to middle class, but far more painful to the higher income brackets. Unfortunately, ever since Bush went on his cut taxes/ spending spree -- and continued by Obama -- this country is on the brink of bankruptcy. Congress and Obama are deadlocked over what to do to fix it. Everybody voted for the elected officials who got us into this mess, so it seems fair that all voters feel the pain to fix our national debt.

Maybe we can learn something about presidents with great ideas like neo-conservative and government health care. DON'T ELECT AND RE-ELECT THEM!

the greater ones income the less likely it will generate income.

 

[steveox]

I think Boehner did a darn good job overall. A newly elected President is a hard person to negotiate against.

So do i. But Harry Reid,,Is doing an awful job in the Senate.He should be removed. Evan Bayh should be Senate Majority leader. He can get along with Republicans. So i think a number of moderate blue dog democrats can force Reid to step aside and nominate Evan Bayh along with Republican vote and he will not go along with Obama. So let him veto every bill congress has the power to over ride it.

 

[Openmind]

So do i. But Harry Reid,,Is doing an awful job in the Senate.He should be removed. Evan Bayh should be Senate Majority leader. He can get along with Republicans. So i think a number of moderate blue dog democrats can force Reid to step aside and nominate Evan Bayh along with Republican vote and he will not go along with Obama. So let him veto every bill congress has the power to over ride it.

You really are a dreamer, aren't you?

 

[dogtowner]

You really are a dreamer, aren't you?

huh... so all this time when you called for moderates to prevail was just blowing smoke. why am I not surprised ?

 

[Openmind]

huh... so all this time when you called for moderates to prevail was just blowing smoke. why am I not surprised ?

What you may call "moderates" are what was known as "conservatives" 30 years ago.
And, as the elections have demonstrated. . .your type of "conservatives" do not make it.

In fact, the "moderate Republicans" are leaving Congress to avoid being mistaken with today's extreme form of conservatism. Too bad Snowe is leaving, she was a moderate.

Blue Dogs Democrats are only Republicans in disguise, and are being voted out, to be replaced by real democrats. . .mostly women.

Maybe you need to review the election maps, and the election results, and you might notice that, in spite of the redistricting that avoided a complete meltdown for Republicans in Congress, Democrats have taken back many seats. . in Congress AND even a couple in the Senate.

"WE THE PEOPLE" have spoken.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2012

http://thinkprogress.org/health/201...ore-pro-choice-after-2012-election/?mobile=nc

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324073504578105313471021072.html

 

[dogtowner]

What you may call "moderates" are what was known as "conservatives" 30 years ago.
And, as the elections have demonstrated. . .your type of "conservatives" do not make it.

In fact, the "moderate Republicans" are leaving Congress to avoid being mistaken with today's extreme form of conservatism. Too bad Snowe is leaving, she was a moderate.

Blue Dogs Democrats are only Republicans in disguise, and are being voted out, to be replaced by real democrats. . .mostly women.

Maybe you need to review the election maps, and the election results, and you might notice that, in spite of the redistricting that avoided a complete meltdown for Republicans in Congress, Democrats have taken back many seats. . in Congress AND even a couple in the Senate.

"WE THE PEOPLE" have spoken.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_2012

http://thinkprogress.org/health/201...ore-pro-choice-after-2012-election/?mobile=nc

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324073504578105313471021072.html

Evan Bayh has been cosidered a moderate forever. He was who steve suggested replace reid.
of course you view obama as moderate which is laughable

 

[Hobo1]

Here's an interesting graphic that shows who pays more 0r less taxes under each of the proposed tax plans. I think the amount being brought into the treasury is interesting. The fiscal cliff is the only option that can bring in enough money to make a dent in the federal debt.

No doubt that the middle class will pay higher taxes. BUT, the rich will pay even more than any other income group.

I feel like everyone in this chart had the right to cast one vote for President - and both grand spenders (Bush and Obama) were re-elected to second terms. I ask you, "Everybody voted in these big spenders, why shouldn't everybody pay a portion of this grand debt we have run up over the past 12 years?". Yes, if we are going to solve this fiscal imbalance we are going to need some real increase in income. Plus we can't forget significant spending cuts either. No pain no gain.

Under any progressive tax system, the rich should pay more than poor. Recent figures show the rich are getting richer and the poor getting poorer - so I support a disproportionately higher tax rates on the rich. BUT, as the graph shows, unless our average American family (making $50,000 per year) doesn't also feel the pain of paying a tax increase we are not going to dig ourselves out of the federal debt. If we just put a band aid on the debt and brush aside this problem, we may well be facing a monetary crisis similar to the 1930 Depression.

 

[dogtowner]

Here's an interesting graphic that shows who pays more 0r less taxes under each of the proposed tax plans. I think the amount being brought into the treasury is interesting. The fiscal cliff is the only option that can bring in enough money to make a dent in the federal debt.

No doubt that the middle class will pay higher taxes. BUT, the rich will pay even more than any other income group.

I feel like everyone in this chart had the right to cast one vote for President - and both grand spenders (Bush and Obama) were re-elected to second terms. I ask you, "Everybody voted in these big spenders, why shouldn't everybody pay a portion of this grand debt we have run up over the past 12 years?". Yes, if we are going to solve this fiscal imbalance we are going to need some real increase in income. Plus we can't forget significant spending cuts either. No pain no gain.

Under any progressive tax system, the rich should pay more than poor. Recent figures show the rich are getting richer and the poor getting poorer - so I support a disproportionately higher tax rates on the rich. BUT, as the graph shows, unless our average American family (making $50,000 per year) doesn't also feel the pain of paying a tax increase we are not going to dig ourselves out of the federal debt. If we just put a band aid on the debt and brush aside this problem, we may well be facing a monetary crisis similar to the 1930 Depression.

perhaps on paper the rich pay more but that fails to account for the tax code which is syructured to prevent any real change for them.
pols who write thst legislation are unlikely to bite the hand that feeds them.
of course bo wants the cliff as it aids the massive expansion in spending projected.

 

[dogtowner]

Here's an interesting graphic that shows who pays more 0r less taxes under each of the proposed tax plans. I think the amount being brought into the treasury is interesting. The fiscal cliff is the only option that can bring in enough money to make a dent in the federal debt.

No doubt that the middle class will pay higher taxes. BUT, the rich will pay even more than any other income group.

I feel like everyone in this chart had the right to cast one vote for President - and both grand spenders (Bush and Obama) were re-elected to second terms. I ask you, "Everybody voted in these big spenders, why shouldn't everybody pay a portion of this grand debt we have run up over the past 12 years?". Yes, if we are going to solve this fiscal imbalance we are going to need some real increase in income. Plus we can't forget significant spending cuts either. No pain no gain.

Under any progressive tax system, the rich should pay more than poor. Recent figures show the rich are getting richer and the poor getting poorer - so I support a disproportionately higher tax rates on the rich. BUT, as the graph shows, unless our average American family (making $50,000 per year) doesn't also feel the pain of paying a tax increase we are not going to dig ourselves out of the federal debt. If we just put a band aid on the debt and brush aside this problem, we may well be facing a monetary crisis similar to the 1930 Depression.

perhaps on paper the rich pay more but that fails to account for the tax code which is syructured to prevent any real change for them.
pols who write thst legislation are unlikely to bite the hand that feeds them.
of course bo wants the cliff as it aids the massive expansion in spending projected.