A DAY TOO LONG IN COMING…BOEHNER FINALLY CALLS IT QUITS…

Well, the day that I have long been waiting for has now finally arrived.  That day being, of course, the day Speaker John Boehner would finally announce that he would resign his seat in Congress and put down the speaker's gavel he took up back in 2011.  And that day finally comes at the end of October.  Too bad he couldn’t have done it much sooner, because at this point I fear that it might be all for naught. And I have this little voice in the back of my head telling me that this is nothing more than his last attempt at sabotaging the 2016 election for the Republicans.  After all, it had been reported that Boehner would face an all-but-certain floor vote this fall that could've ousted him from the position, so apparently he chose to leave on his own.

Considering the fact that Boehner was first elected to the House back in 1990 he’s had a pretty good run of 25 years.  He was part of former Speaker Newt Gingrich’s leadership team when Republicans took over the House in 1995 for the first time in four decades but was ousted from his leadership role in the wake of the GOP’s rather disappointing performance in the 1998 midterms.  And it was in 2006 that he won the race to succeed Tom DeLay as the House’s No. 2 Republican when DeLay stepped aside as majority leader. And it in 2007 after Democrats retook the chamber that he maneuvered himself in the job of top Republican.  And he has essentially been nothing but an abject failure ever since assuming the position.

As speaker, his tenure has been defined by his early struggles to reach budget agreements with Barry “Almighty” and his wrestling with the expectations of Tea Party conservatives who demanded a far more confrontational approach.  In 2013, conservatives drove him to reluctantly embrace a ‘partial’ government shutdown in hopes of delaying implementation of the new health care law.  Now, Tea Party lawmakers have been pressing him to retry the tactic to try to take away federal funding from Planned Parenthood following the disclosure of controversial videos involving its practices of procuring fetal tissue for research purposes.  Boehner’s time as Speaker has been ruled by his unwillingness to take the fight to the Democrats.

Gathered below are just a few of the reasons that Boehner's nearly five-year run left him embattled in his own party, and finally lead to his resignation.

1. He is unpopular among conservative voters — "Of the 4,025 polled, less than 6 percent would want their Representative to re-elect Boehner as House Speaker if the election were held today," Citizens United President David Bossie wrote in July. "Grassroots conservatives are through being patient with John Boehner."

2. His frequent crying does not instill confidence — In the past, Boehner has wept openly while giving speeches, adding a heartfelt touch to political events that can often be quite dry. In July of this year, however, he shed tears while speaking to an interviewer from The Golf Channel, of all places — an incident that many commented was a bit strange.

3. He lost many Obamacare arguments in the media — This year, several left-leaning media outlets sought to hold Boehner accountable for his past predictions about the Affordable Care Act, and he failed to hit back. Chuck Todd of NBC’s "Meet the Press" asked Boehner if he was wrong on Obamacare, as more people had insurance as a result, and the country added jobs the year it was implemented. Boehner's response quickly went into the weeds, talking about hours worked and employer burdens — arguments few found compelling.

4. He has been slow to react to political opportunities — Rep. Richard Nugent, R-Florida, was kicked off the Rules Committee after he publicly criticized Boehner for his shortcomings. He specifically called out Boehner's 18-month delay in appointing a select committee to investigate the 2012 Benghazi attacks, as well as his months-long delay in filing a lawsuit against President Barack Obama's overreaching executive actions.

5. He has a record of voting to inflate the nation's debt — As FreedomWorks reported, Boehner voted at least five times from 2002 to 2008 to increase the U.S. debt by $450 billion to $900 billion at a time. "[I]n total, John Boehner voted to increase America's debt by 3.631 trillion-with-a-t dollars," the conservative outfit reported.

6. He is unlikely to fight for defunding Planned Parenthood this fall — After multiple undercover videos have called into question whether the organization has violated the law in performing abortions, many high-profile Republicans called for defunding. After Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell signaled an unwillingness to fight in the face of a likely veto from Obama, Boehner is likely to follow suit.

7. He worked with Democrats to pass the "cromnibus" bill funding Obama's immigration plans — This past December, 67 Republicans voted against the legislation, while Boehner sided with the opposition party, harnessing 57 of their votes to pass the bill. He then offered empty rhetoric to his conservative colleagues, vowing an immigration fight in 2015 that has yet to materialize.

Obviously I am not the least bit sad to see him go.  And like I said earlier, I wish he could have come to this decision with there being more time left in this congressional session.  He has been nothing short of useless while in the position of Speaker.  And something tells me he will be yet another one of those who simply refuses to quietly ride off into the sunset.  But while I am thrilled to see Boehner go I’m less than thrilled to find out that his replacement is likely to be Kevin McCarthy.  Because as far as I’m concerned, when it comes to being a genuine conservative McCarthy differs very little from Boehner.  And keep in mind, we still have that spineless hack, Mitch McConnell, in the Senate.  And I doubt very much that we’ll be able to get rid of him.  

BOEHNER ON…BOEHNER…

Feeling empowered and fighting back a bit after successfully turning back a challenge to his House leadership position, Speaker John Boehner attempted to make the case that he remains an outsider to the conventions of Congress.  And in so doing Boehner said, "During my years here when I voted, I had the eighth-most conservative voting record in the Congress, and it does pain me to be described as spineless or a squish."  Voting is one thing, leading is something entirely different, and on the latter he has been a squish.  

Boehner, who won his third term as speaker this week, told reporters on Thursday that, "But what pains me the most is when they describe me as the establishment.”  He went on to say, "I’m the most anti-establishment Speaker we’ve ever had."  In talking about his record, Boehner said, "Who was the guy who got rid of earmarks? Me. Who's the guy who believes in regular order? Me."  Adding, "Who believes in allowing more members to participate in the process from both sides of the aisle? Me."

While 25 of his House colleagues demonstrated the necessary courage to vote against him, Boehner pointed to the climate of dislike from a public that is furious with the ongoing congressional gridlock and what some view as the economic demise of the middle class. He said, "The American people are very frustrated. They are frustrated in a struggling economy."  Adding, "This frustration that's out there, they need to take it out on somebody. They take it out on the president; they take it out on me. It comes with the territory."

Boehner has served Ohio's 8th Congressional District since 1991, and has been described as having taken a rather dim view of those who chose to oppose his leadership run.  And while some have described recent actions taken to demote his detractors as revenge, others say his new-found boldness is welcomed and timely as the new GOP-led Congress asserts its power.  But conservative Iowa lawmaker Steve King, who voted against Boehner, decried his perceived retribution. 

King said, "If you cannot vote your conscience … then it’s clearly a dysfunctional system here."   But according to The Washington Examiner there was at least one conservative newbie who was only too happy to explain her vote for Boehner.  It was Utah Rep. Mia Love who said, "There were no qualified or notable campaigns for speaker within the Republican Party other than John Boehner."  So if I’m understanding her correctly, is she saying that Boehner won by default?

Anyway, Ms. Love, who I was a pretty big fan of, went on to say, "Casting a vote for a candidate who has not actively campaigned and does not have the support to be speaker is an indirect vote for Nancy Pelosi, and I will not vote for Nancy Pelosi."  Look, she can try to justify her vote however she wishes, but I have to admit that because of her decision to support Boehner she has already be a source of some disappointment.  She billed herself as being a conservative and yet she seemed to have little difficulty voting for Boehner.

Frankly, I have a rather difficult time respecting those who find it necessary, or even appropriate, to blow their own horn.  And Boehner, and his supporters, can claim he’s a conservative till the cows come home, but his actions over the course of the last 4 years, and the fact the deficit has been allowed to grow by over $4 Trillion on his watch as Speaker, make his claims ring rather hollow.  It’s because of his refusal to stand up to Barry that has many folks referring to him as being spineless and a bit of a squish.

BOEHNER IS NOT A LEADER…

I think most of us would agree that even on his best day, John Boehner is simply not up to task of being Speaker of the House.  It has become quite obvious, even painfully so, over the course of the last 4 years that Boehner is completely devoid of those traits one typically looks for in a ‘leader’.  Perhaps in a different time, a more prosperous time, a time less dangerous or a time when we had someone in the Oval Office who could be trusted to operate from within the confines of our Constitution, then Boehner might be acceptable as Speaker.  But not today, not in these times and most definitely not when we have Barry “Almighty” in the Oval Office.

And it was very shortly after his successful re-election as Speaker, that Boehner once again made it quite clear that is no leader, and is nothing more than a fraud able to one again maneuver himself in a leadership ‘position’.  And make no mistake, there is a very real difference.  After all, it was shortly after the vote that had him being re-elected that we heard how it was that he intended to mete out a little payback to those who chose not to support his re-election.  Now, apparently, contrary to those initial reports, Boehner is sending signals that he plans to be magnanimous in his victory.  But rumor also has it those supposed signals are nothing more than bullshit.

If we can believe what we are now being told, Boehner has told committee chairmen, such as Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Oversight and Government Reform, that they can make their own decisions regarding who is to be named to head those subcommittees under their jurisdiction.  There are indications Rep. Richard Nugent of Florida may yet get to serve again on the Rules Committee.  Rep. Mark Meadows of North Carolina and Rep. Scott Garrett of New Jersey may wind up chairing subcommittees.  And it was all three of Republicans who voted ‘not’ to re-elect the speaker.  I think it is a little too early to believe much of what we’re hearing, we must wait and see.

It was on Wednesday of this week that Boehner told reporters, "We had a situation yesterday where we had to constitute the Rules Committee but because of some of the activities on the floor, two of our members weren't put back on the committee immediately."  He then went on to say, "I have not had a chance to talk to them, I have not had a chance to talk to our members. But this morning, I told the members the same thing I'm saying here. We're going to have a family conversation, which we had this morning, about bringing our team together."  As I said, we must be in no hurry to believe what we’re being told, we must wait to see what actions are taken.

Boehner is said to be under considerable pressure from those who make up his ‘leadership’ team, including California Rep. Devin Nunes, to discipline those who have denigrated him as a "Republican-in-name-only" or who voted against him for speaker.  Is this guy serious?  And it was this Nunes character, who just so happens to be the newly appointed chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, who said, "We need to know why people voted against the speaker yesterday."  Now personally, I would have thought that that would have been fairly obvious, even to this sanctimonious boob, Nunes!  I guess I don’t see the point he’s trying to make here.    

And someone else who appears to be eager to make disparaging remarks about those who comprised the anti-Boehner bloc, is none other than Rep. Peter King of New York, yet another well-known RINO.  It was King who said, "I believe if you take on the leader and you lose, you face the consequences."  Personally, I happen to be of the opinion that such an attitude is rather juvenile, and therefore it doesn’t really surprise me to hear who it was that made such idiotic comments.  The choice here is a relatively easy one, either we move beyond this political bullshit and focus on Barry, or we fight among ourselves allowing him to do what he pleases.

But on the positive side there are signs that the speaker's critics are interested in working with him.  Rep. Ted Yoho, one of those who went up against Boehner said, "There is no fight."  And he went on to say, "For the next two years, our goal right now is to come together with leadership, bring in good legislation, work with leadership so that we can overcome some of the grievances we had."  And Nugent, on Wednesday, described the speaker as a "true conservative."  Observers say that Boehner could always revisit the issue of retribution. For now, both because of temperament and expediency, he is disinclined to mete out punishment.  But we’ll see.

I guess what really has me worried, is that ever since Barry arrived on the scene, the role of Speaker has become increasingly important to our being able to ensure the survival of our Republic.  And as you may recall it was during the first two years of Barry Barry’s presidency that Nancy Pelosi reduced the position of Speaker to what was essentially nothing more than a rubberstamp for anything that Barry wanted.  And while hopes were high when Boehner assumed the job in January 2011, it didn’t take long to recognize that even with a new sheriff in town, not much was going to change. Sadly, Boehner has proven to be pretty much of a failure.   

THE TIME HAS COME FOR BOEHNER TO GO!!!

Let me be perfectly blunt here, if I may. John Boehner has been an unmitigated disaster as Speaker of the House. The conduct that we have continued to see from Boehner, going all the way back to 2011 when he first became Speaker, has been less than impressive, and the time has now come to do something about it. The convening of the next Congress, come January, will bring with it an opportunity to rid ourselves of Boehner, and we should take full advantage of that opportunity.

And what irritates me to no end about this guy is the fact that the federal debt has now been allowed to increase by a staggering $3.8 Trillion in the brief 3.8 years that have passed since Boehner cut his first spending deal with Senate Democrats and Barry "Almighty". That works out to $32,938.38 for every household in the United States, including those taking federal welfare benefits, and $42,783.20 for every full-time year-round private-sector worker in the United States.

In fact, the $42,783.20 that the federal government has borrowed per full-time year-round private-sector worker since Boehner cut his first federal spending deal exceeds the $41,916 that according to the Census Bureau was the median annual earnings of full-time year-round private-sector wage and salary workers in 2013. He is no more qualified to have his job than is Barry "Almighty" qualified to have his! For such a thing to have taken place on Boehner’s watch is unconscionable!

Boehner became speaker in January 2011, after the Republicans, thanks to the Tea Party, won a majority of the House of Representatives in the midterm elections of 2010. And I suppose we should have learned something from that election, since none of the promises we were made then were kept either. At that time, the government was operating under a continuing resolution that expired on March 4, 2011. Before that CR expired, Boehner cut a spending deal to fund the government after it expired.

Ever since March 4, 2011, all federal spending has been authorized by laws passed by the Republican-controlled House that Boehner leads. At the close of business on March 4, 2011, the federal debt was $14,182,627,184,881.03, according to the Treasury. At the close of business on Dec. 9, 2014, it was $17,997,912,502,715.74. From March 11, 2011 through Dec. 9, 2014, the debt increased $3,815,285,317,834.71. And as I said, 1,376 days—or 3.8 years—transpired between March 4, 2011 and Dec. 11, 2014.

The $3.8 Trillion in new debt that the federal government has accumulated under the spending deals approved by a Republican-controlled House of Representatives over the past 3.8 years equals $2,772,736,422.84 in new debt per day. It also equals $32,938.38 in new debt for each of the 115,831,000 households the Census Bureau says were in the United States as of September, and $42,783.29 for each of the 89,177,000 full-time year-round private-sector workers that the Census Bureau says were in the United States in 2013.

Ok, so it’s too late to correct this most recent example of Boehner’s ‘leadership’, but the point must be made, in the strongest way possible, that if Boehner is allowed to remain as Speaker, it will be we the voters, not the big time donors, who will no longer support the party. Even if it means that we will be forced to endure, at least potentially, decades of Democrat Party rule. We must hold to account the architect of this vote last night, and we must make it known that our line in the sand is the removal of John Boehner as Speaker of the House. Cross it at your peril!

BOEHNER DELIVERS ANOTHER KNIFE INTO THE BACK OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE…

With this past November’s election I think most would agree that what the American people provided to the Republican Party was a bona fide mandate. They made it very clear that they were more than just little displeased with the direction that Barry is taking this country, and they wanted a stop put to it. But how is it that the House Republicans have demonstrated that, yes, they heard the concerns of the people and intend to act on them? Apparently by choosing to fund everything that Barry wanted, and not until next February, but for all of next year.

And ya know, I chose to go to the polls last November, and to vote straight Republcian, because I was willing to give Boehner, in the House, and McConnell, in the Senate, a chance, even though I’ve lost count of the number of times that they have both disappointed me in the past. But I gotta tell ya, in seeing the video of Boehner being so proud of his ‘accomplishment’ of once again screwing over the American people, that was pretty much the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. And our majority leader, Kevin McCarthy, is no better.

But despite the growing displeasure, from myself and a growing number of others, with Boehner’s inability to actually lead, the general consensus is that come January he will once again be elected Speaker. And when that in fact does happen, then, my friends, those of us who still love our country are going to have to come up with our own plan of action regarding how it is that we are going to respond to what many of us will view as being a most egregious act of blatant betrayal. And we can ill afford to accept such an act lying down.

And as I mentioned earlier, it’s not only the House Republicans with whom I am less than thrilled. Because it’s over in the Senate that the Mitch McConnell we’re now hearing from ‘after’ the election, bears very little resemblance, if any, to the Mitch McConnell we all heard ‘before’ the election. But unfortunately we’re not in the position of being able to do much if anything about it, at least anything of substance, for another two years. And I can only assume that the thinking is that by then we will have all forgotten all about this blatant act of betrayal.

And if these Republican ‘leaders’ are actually foolish enough to think that we who call ourselves conservatives will soon forget what has been perpetrated against us, and so soon after the election the result of which was the handing over to them the complete control of Congress, then I’m here to tell you they are very sadly mistaken. All they had to do in order to prove that they were serious about stopping Barry’s anti-America agenda was to create a spending bill that covered things until next February, but they just could not bring themselves to do it.

So it is with somewhat of a heavy heart that I’ve now come to the realization that the only option we may have left is that, come 2016, by which time, admittedly, it may very well be too late, those of us who love this country must devise a way of engineering a purge, of sorts, of our pathetic excuse for Republican leadership. While I have never been one to advocate the staying home on Election Day, after this fiasco last night, I’m not sure how else we can make our point. And if the result is a Congress dominated by Democrats, so be it, after all, what’s the difference?

I’m just so tired of the endless stream of excuses that I keep hearing from those on our side who think of themselves as leaders. Making excuses is just not what ‘leaders’ do! They Lead! Just once I wish those on our side would play the game a little more like the way the Democrats do. I’d like to see them be a bit more cutthroat and a little less whiny. And I’d like to see them a little less worried about their careers and a little more concerned about whether or not this country is going to survive. But I fear that is little more than wishful thinking on my part.

These days I find myself stuck somewhere between being totally exasperated and being frustrated beyond belief. It seems that I can’t even count on those that I vote for. My representative, Ander Crenshaw voted for this recent ‘budget’ and my Republican Senator, Marco Rubio, was part of the ‘Gang of Eight’s’ immigration fiasco. I held my nose when last voting for Crenshaw, and have regretted doing so practically since the very moment that I did it. I thought maybe, just maybe, this time was going to be different. I apologize for being naïve.

Maintaining Boehner as Speaker will, in all likelihood, prove quite detrimental to our election chances come 2016, but that won’t prevent him from being re-elected. Let’s be honest, many of those who voted for Republicans this past November did so as a means of protesting against Barry, and his policies. They voted for GOP candidates because they were told the Republicans were going to work to rein in Barry. Now many are feeling they were simply lied to, and rightly so. So where is the incentive for them, or anyone else, to ever vote for Republicans again?

BOEHNER IS JUST PLAIN USELESS…

I freely admit that I have never, ever, been a fan of John Boehner, and I have felt going all the way back to 2010 that we would be doing ourselves a huge favor if we were to come up with a different Speaker. Someone like a Trey Gowdy, for instance. Because whenever listening to Boehner you never really know out of which side of his mouth he is speaking.

For instance, it was in his very first post-election press conference that Boehner was heard to say, "My job is to listen to the American people. The American people have made it clear, they're not for Obamacare. Ask all those Democrats who lost their elections Tuesday night." Sorry, but claiming to be listening to the American people and acting like it, are two very different things.

Because in listening to what he said during that same press conference, I think there may be some doubt that he’s really listening. He said, "So, the House, I'm sure, at some point next year, we'll move to repeal Obamacare because it should be repealed and it should be replaced with common sense reforms that respect the doctor/patient relationship."

Now it’s time to put your thinking caps on and let’s try to decipher what it was that Boehner was REALLY saying. Was he saying that: He intends for the House to terminate implementation of Obamacare at some point in the next year, or was he actually saying that he intends for the House to ensure Obamacare is implemented next year? Which is it?

And Boehner also said, "You've all heard me say, starting two years ago yesterday, that our immigration system is broken and needs to be fixed. But I've made clear to the president that if he acts unilaterally on his own, outside of his authority, he will poison the well and there will be no chance for immigration reform moving in this Congress. It's as simple as that."

So everyone put those thinking caps back on one more time and tell me what you think that Boehner might really have been telling us. Was he saying that: He intends for the House to stop Barry "Almighty" from unilaterally and unconstitutionally granting amnesty to illegal aliens, OR that he intends for the House to permit Barry to do so. Again, which is it?

Boehner also said, "I believe that we need to ... address the debt that's hurting our economy and imprisoning the future of our kids and grandkids." So again, did he mean that he intends for the House to significantly cut spending in its next long-term funding bill, OR did he mean that he intends for the House to approve a new long-term funding bill that includes all of the spending that Barry wants?

Back on Sept. 18, the House Republican leaders ‘pushed’ through a short-term continuing resolution to fund the government until Dec. 11. What this CR did was to punt all substantive issues until after the election. It fully funded Obamacare, including the regulation that requires individual Christians to buy coverage for abortion-inducing drugs even if that violates their religious faith.

As well, it fully funded Planned Parenthood, the nation's leading abortion provider. And it did absolutely nothing to stop Barry from using money from the Treasury to implement an unconstitutional unilateral amnesty granting legal status to illegal aliens. They say actions speak louder than words, and Boehners actions do not lead one to believe that Boehner is listenings.

By agreeing to a CR that expires on Dec. 11 rather than Jan. 11, the House Republican leaders not only ensured that they would not need to fight with Barry over any significant issues before the election, they also made it possible to prevent incoming Republican majorities in both houses from having any substantive say over major policy issues until at least next September.

Prior to the election, Politico published a story based on an interview with House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy. Politico reported that McCarthy "would like to use the lame-duck session to pass a long-term government-funding bill, so Washington can begin focusing on big-picture legislating, instead of just trying to keep government's doors open."

In plain English what is intended here is for the Republican leaders to cut a spending deal with Barry and out-going Senate Majority Leader ‘Dingy Harry’ Reid in December before the new Republican majorities in the House and Senate are sworn in. Such a deal would run through Sept. 30 of next year and would be like the deal Republican leaders cut with Barry and Reid this past September.

Because it would then permit Barry to spend money doing everything he truly finds important. And it would allow the new Republican Congress to hold a string of symbolic votes next year on stand-alone pieces of legislation that Obama can afford to veto without shutting down the whole government or even part of it. Barry will get substance. Republicans will get symbols.

Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama is calling for a different strategy. He wants to actually prevent Barry from unilaterally granting amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. "He must be stopped," Sessions wrote in a commentary for Politico this week. And I agree. Our leaders cannot be timid in taking whatever measures necessary to stop Barry, it’s why they were elected!

Barry's amnesty, Sessions said, "cannot be implemented if Congress simply includes routine language on any government funding bill prohibiting the expenditure of funds for this unlawful purpose. This is the same way we prevented the president from closing Guantanamo Bay. Such application of congressional power is ordinary, unexceptional, and used thousands of times.

"Congress has the power of the purse," said Sessions. "The president cannot spend a dime unless Congress appropriates it." The ONLY way Barry can carry out a unilateral amnesty, implement Obamacare, or attack religious liberty is if Boehner's House once again gives him the money to do it.

Over the course of the next two years we are going to have to keep a very close eye on not only Mr. Boehner, but every single Republican member of Congress. A little micro-management of these folks is not only required, by very necessary. We simply can no longer afford to accept at face value anything that they tell us. They work for us, we must not allow them to forget that!

IT REALLY IS TIME FOR A NEW ‘SPEAKER’…

Now look, I’ll be the first one to admit that I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer. So I guess I’m going to need someone to explain to me what useful purpose John Boehner serves anyone in his current position of House Speaker. Is it that I’m just missing something about this guy? Because when this boob recently made it very clear, or at least seemed to, that should Barry "Almighty" takes actions that exceed his constitutional authority, the House of Representatives currently has no plans to use its own constitutional authority to withhold funding from those actions, I said to myself, "WHY THE FU*K NOT?"

And then I read somewhere that it was during ‘Boner’s’ weekly press briefing, that he was asked by some enterprising young reporter, "You’ve said you disagree with calls to impeach the president over abuse of power via executive actions. But under the Constitution the House actually has the power of the purse. So, if the President takes actions that exceed his Constitutional authority, will you withhold funding for those actions in the next must-pass appropriations bill? ‘Boner’ responded saying, "There’s a lot of ways to deal with this issue." Oh really? Then why haven’t any of them been used?

‘Boner’ then went on to say, "But we’ve got a Republican House and we’ve got a Democratic Senate. And there are a lot of things we’ve passed here that the Senate clearly has not passed." ‘Boner’ continued, "Now, when it comes to that issue, some of these actions that you could defund, there clearly isn’t, I wouldn’t guess, an appetite in the United States Senate to withhold those funds." He said, "That’s why we’ve decided that the more direct approach of suing the president is the right path to go down here." So because of political cowardice we refuse to use the power granted to us by the Constitution and instead choose to sue?

‘Boner" then went on to say, "Listen, I’m for upholding the Constitution." Adding, "And I’m for protecting the interest of the House vis-à-vis the power grab that’s going on by the White House. And while he has the authority to issue executive orders, he does not have the authority to unilaterally change laws in our country, which he has done." And all those on our side continue to do is to simply sit on their hands? This is just crazy! Just once I wish those on our side would have the guts to approach things the same way that Democrats do. Nice guys finish last, and to tell you the truth, I’m getting tired of it!

Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7 of the U.S. Constitution does not say that the House of Representative shall sue the president and or the Executive Branch. What it says is: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time." Federal spending laws regularly include language prohibiting the Executive Branch from using funds for certain purposes. ‘Boner’ just hasn’t got the guts to do what everybody knows has to be done.

Appropriations bills must be passed by both the House and Senate and be signed by the president—or overcome his veto—before they become law. This means that the House has the constitutional authority to pass a bill that withholds funding for executive actions, including those they believe exceed the president’s constitutional authority. Now the Senate can refuse to pass, or the president can refuse to sign, a bill passed by the House that prohibits funding for Executive actions the House deems unconstitutional or outside the scope of the Executive’s legal authority, but unless the House relents and agrees to fund that activity, the Executive cannot engage in it.

For instance, at the end of the last fiscal year, the Republican-controlled House initially passed a continuing resolution to fund the government that denied funding for implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare. The Senate, of course, refused to pass a CR as long as it contained that language, and, of course, Barry "Almighty" refused to accept one. So after 16 days, the House caved, as it usually does, and proceeded to pass a CR that permitted implementation of Obamacare. This is not how we’re doing to get ourself out this Democrat inspired fiscal and economic mess that we’re in.

And then ‘Boner’ announced this past June that the House now plans to sue Barry for taking unilateral actions that exceed his legal authority, saying at the time that abuse of power affords Barry "king-like authority at the expense of the American people and their elected legislators." ‘Boner’ said, "On matters ranging from health care and energy to foreign policy and education, President Obama has repeatedly run an end-around." ‘Boner’ added that Barry has a habit of "ignoring some statutes completely, selectively enforcing others and at times, creating laws of his own." Our president has gone rogue.

And when he was asked earlier this month if he agrees with calls by some Republicans to impeach Barry for severe executive overreach, Boner simply answered, "I disagree." Again I think this is nothing more than an act of pure political cowardice on the part of ‘Boner’ and many of those routinely characterized as being ‘Establishment Republicans’, aka RINOs. Impeachment is clearly warranted in looking back at Barry’s behavior over the period of time that he has been in office. There has been one scandal after another as well as numerous examples where Barry has abused the power of his office.

For the sake of argument let’s just say that the Republicans maintain control of the House and gain control of the Senate. They are going to have just 24 months to effect some sort of positive change. Now they can pussyfoot around and get booted out of power in 2016 or they can take the bull by the horns in trying to get the country turned around, and quite possibly offend some people along the way. But when it comes to 2016 many people will likely look at what progress, if any, that has been made in getting things back under the control of the people and not the government, and will then vote accordingly.

BOEHNER HAS BEEN A DISASTER AND HE NEEDS TO GO…

Word now comes to us that allies of Speaker Boehner are now attempting to busy themselves by circling the wagons in what appears to be an all-out effort to ward off any and all potential challenges to his leadership, and I use the term loosely, by their Tea Party colleagues. And by so doing they are once a demonstrating a willingness to put politics over country. I think many of us will agree that Boehner has definitely outlived whatever usefulness he may have once had. Our Tea Party brethren are only looking to do that which so desperately needs to be done.

And it’s according to Politico there is now a group, including fellow Ohio GOP Rep. Pat Tiberi, that has been very busy plotting different strategies that could be utilized to punish those members who do not support the party's nominee during a floor vote, such as, for instance, withdrawing membership on certain committees. And there are even some who are advocating the putting out of a letter with the names of dozens of lawmakers pledging to vote only for the 64-year-old, thereby removing the possibility of a conservative rival getting himself, or herself, elected.

The effort among the GOP Establishment is but the latest attempt to signal its dominance in the battle with Tea Party forces which broke-out during the government shutdown last year and is continuing to play out in several primaries. It is also an attempt to quell speculation about plans for Boehner to retire, while solidifying his authority over the conference. Let’s face it, Boehner has been an unmitigated disaster, and those who are now so energetically acting on his behalf only serve to reveal where it is that their true allegiance lies, and it most definitely is not with the people.

While the leadership contest is still eight months away, allies want to get an early start to prevent a repeat of 2013 when Boehner's leadership was challenged after a dozen conservatives chose other Republicans during the leadership vote. Michael Steel, a spokesman for Boehner, has said that Boehner "has said repeatedly he expects to be speaker in the next Congress, so when the House Republican team meets after the election, he hopes and expects he will be their choice for speaker, and once that decision is made, that the team will vote for him on the floor in January."

If the House picks up the predicted five to 12 seats, as expected, Boehner could count it ‘another success’ of his leadership. Meanwhile, at least 12 lawmakers who voted against him will be leaving Congress at the end of this term, and some who are staying have shifted their loyalties in favor of him. Regardless, unseating any incumbent speaker is always difficult, given the voting procedures which start with a closed meeting by secret ballot in which one must secure one vote more than half. Then a floor vote follows, with the successful nominee requiring 218 votes to win.

And of course adding to the degree of difficulty in replacing Boehner is the fact that potential opponents, at least at this point in time, appear to be somewhat disorganized, and no obvious candidate has yet emerged to take on Boehner. And with the leadership taking early action to gain open support for Boehner, it appears they are looking for possible opponents to show their cards early as well. "If you disagree with a play call, you say so in the huddle," said one GOP leadership aide aligned with Boehner. Who went on to say, "You don't go your own way on the field."

Look, it would be nice, and likely a lot less messy, if those in Boehner’s district would be able to see the light and simply choose not to re-elect him. But I suppose such a fantasy takes wishful thinking to a whole new level. Or, Boehner could make himself into a real hero by choosing to put the needs of the country above his own selfish desire for political power and simply remove himself. But I suppose that’s even more of a fantasy than the first option. So we’re left only to watch those whom we elect to be our advocates dueling it out like punks in a schoolyard.

It’s just all so frustrating, and rather disappointing, that as our country continues headed down the drain there remains so little interest by so many of our elected officials in doing even the slightest thing to prevent, or to at least to slow down, that which now appears to be the inevitable. It doesn’t take, or at least it shouldn’t, a brain surgeon to see that Boehner simply does not possess the necessary skillset to be able to get done that which must be done. And with us now on the verge of running out of time, we no longer have the luxury of allowing the incompetent to ‘lead’.

BOEHNER SEEMS SET TO BETRAY US AGAIN…

Well, if you can believe Barry "Almighty’s" top adviser and fellow communist, Valerie Jarrett, and I’m not saying that you can or cannot, it seems that we may once again be on the verge of being knifed in the back by our stellar Speaker of the House, John Boehner. It was Jarrett who told a group of global elites on Thursday in Las Vegas, Nevada that Boehner has made a commitment to the White House to try to pass ‘amnesty’ legislation this year.

After hailing the Senate's amnesty bill that the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) determined would actually lower wages for American workers, Jarrett told attendees at the yearly invitation-only SkyBridge Alternatives Conference that Boehner would help the White House make a push to get immigration reform enacted in the next three months. While I’m not saying that I believe her, but Boehner has proven that he can’t really be trusted.

Jarrett said, "I think we have a window this summer, between now and August, to get something done." And she went on to say, "We have a commitment from Speaker Boehner, who’s very frustrated with his caucus." Actually, I’d say many in his caucus are frustrated with him, especially when it comes to his willingness to bend over backwards to assist Barry while claiming at the same that he’s doing no such thing. He’s absolutely useless!

In making the claim that the Senate's bill would pass in the House if Republicans brought it to the floor, Jarrett was echoing the sentiments of Rep. Luis Gutierrez, Democrat, who has said that Democrats would want a piecemeal approach to immigration reform ‘IF’ they get all of the pieces of the Senate bill, said that there were "a lot of ways to skin a cat" and that there would be "mounting pressure" on amnesty legislation in the coming months.

The Senate's bill would double and possibly even triple the number of H1-B visas that high-tech lobbying groups covet even though our universities are graduating more workers in the science, technology, engineering, and math fields than there are jobs for. In addition, illegal immigrants put on a path to citizenship and given work visas could qualify for any job, reducing opportunities for Americans on the bottom rungs of the economic ladder.

Boehner, who hired Sen. John McCain's top amnesty adviser at the end of the last year, has previously told fundraisers in Las Vegas that he was "hellbent" on getting amnesty legislation done this year and then mocked conservative opponents of amnesty at an event in his Ohio district. Boehner also said that what he and Barry agreed the most on, when they met at the White House in February of this year, was on amnesty legislation.

House GOP leaders like Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), the GOP Conference Chair, have also floated an August deadline to get legislation on the House floor while business executives have said they thought amnesty legislation would be the "final act" of the lame-duck session. What is this urgency that Republicans have for, quite literally, creating for the Democrat Party 11 Million brand new, freshly minted, constituents? It’s insanity!

And it becomes all the more infuriating when we’re told by such party luminaries as Sen. Marco Rubio, as well as other GOP leaders, as we were on Wednesday, that even if Congress is pressured not to act on immigration legislation this year, Republicans in the Senate would "absolutely" try to pass ‘amnesty’ legislation again in the next Congress if Republicans are successful in their attempt to win back the Senate in November.

I simply do understand this need the Republicans have to be in such a hurry to bring about what would be the effective end of their party. I voted for Rubio, and now very much regret doing so. I might as well have voted for Crist. Why is it that we can’t simply enforce the laws we already have on the books? The very same laws that are now being treated as if they simply don’t exist by the same guy that Boehner seems to be so hellbent to assist!

BOEHNER IS UNDESERVING OF SPEAKERSHIP…

I think it’s probably pretty obvious to those who may stop by here from time to time to peruse these pages that I have never really been a big fan of John Boehner. Since having been provided with control of the House after the election of 2010, he’s done nothing but to squander one opportunity after another, and has assisted Barry in increasing the debt by over $3 Trillion. And while having done precious little to derail Obamacare, he is now seeking to help Barry to put yet another feather in his cap, while assisting in the demise of his own party, by stubbornly pushing forward with immigration ’reform’.

And now comes word from Rep. Raul Labrador, of Idaho, who has said that House Speaker John Boehner should lose his leadership post if continues with his push for immigration reform this year. Well I can’t say that I can disagree with that assessment of things. Mr. Labrador said in a recent interview with the Capitol Hill news organization, "I think it should cost him his speakership." Mr. Labrador also refused to rule out running to replace Mr. Boehner — even if the Ohio Republican put the brakes on immigration bills. While I’m not all that familiar with Mr. Labrador, I’m sure he would be an improvement.

And in another interview, this one with CQ Roll Call, Mr. Labrador also said, "There is a hunger in the conference for bold, visionary leaders, and this is not just conservatives — you talk to more middle-of-the-road members of the conference, they’re kind of frustrated with the direction of this leadership, and they’re looking for ways to change that." Well if there is one thing you can say about Boehner, it’s that he is neither bold nor is he what anyone might refer to as being a visionary. He is nothing more than an establishment Republican, a RINO, who cares about nothing more than maintaining the status quo.

The fact that House GOP leaders unveiled their broad immigration principles last week gave hope to advocates and to Barry that the first changes in the nation's laws in three decades might happen in the coming months. Immigration legislation is one of the top priorities for Barry's second term. But several of the conservatives were adamant that the House do nothing on the issue this year, a midterm election year when the GOP is angling to gain six seats in the Senate and seize majority control. Democrats currently have a 55-45 advantage but are defending more seats, including ones in Republican-leaning states.

And then Boehner said on Tuesday that he is not sure whether he will pursue immigration bills this year, and yet that was just days after House leaders outlined their ‘principles’ at an annual GOP retreat that included border security and legalization for most illegal immigrants. The plan also included a specific new pathway for younger illegal immigrants. So, we can’t really believe much of what he says. And if you can’t trust your ‘leaders’ to tell you the truth, what good are they? And at this point in time I don’t trust Boehner any more than I trust Barry. I’m just so damn tired of being lied to.

BOEHNER SEEMS TO BE TRYING TO RUN ROUGHSHOD OVER IMMIGRATION…

Well, it would seem that while Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell, on Tuesday, was telling reporters that immigration is just wasn’t going to be in the cards this year, Speaker John ‘Boner’ Boehner seems to have other ideas about it, demonstrating that he isn't quite ready to let the dream die. And this despite the fact that the editors from National Review, Weekly Standard, and numerous other top conservative pundits have urged the Ohio Republican to just let it go for now. But ever since the GOP retreat last week, Boehner has just kept marching along to the beat of his own immigration drummer.

And it all just kinda makes me wonder just whose side it is that old ‘Boner’ is really on. Because it was at a press conference Tuesday morning, in response to a question from Breitbart News, that Boehner said, "Clearly, the draft principles we outlined, members seemed to be supportive of them," adding, "no decisions have been made" on whether to move forward. But then we also had one GOP member, identified as being one ‘in the know’, who said, "I wouldn't be surprised" if immigration legislation came to the House floor as early as this spring. Come on people, this is all just so simple and is being made far too complicated.

So in what I assume was an effort to build his case for moving forward, Boner's office has released several documents touting these GOP ‘principles’, some of which include some almost cartoonish defenses of a proposal. These so-called "principles" would "eliminate the ability for any administration to arbitrarily decide which laws to enforce," a Q&A posted on Boner's website says. Despite his efforts, immigration is still likely to be a tough slog, no matter what ‘Boner’ may want. The push back from conservatives has caused significant tremors of doubt within ‘Boner's’ leadership team.

GOP Whip Kevin McCarthy, who has made it clear that, on a personal level, he strongly supports moving forward on the issue, is feeling some heat back home. The California Republican represents a highly conservative district where there’s a lot of anti-amnesty sentiment. And then we have Majority Leader Eric Cantor who has put major effort into a GOP version of the DREAM Act, which grants amnesty to the children of illegal immigrants. But he is also keeping an eye to his right in the event ‘Boner’ retires at the end of this Congress, leaving the seat open for Cantor to claim.

And then, or course, we have yet another amnesty favoring RINO in Paul Ryan, who confirmed on Tuesday that he has met ‘secretly’ with top Democrat Chuckie Schumer on immigration but, or course, dismissed the importance of the session, which he claimed occurred last year. After first raising some serious doubts about whether immigration could come to the floor this year in a Sunday television interview, Ryan was far more optimistic in his remarks to reporters Tuesday. "It wasn't really bad," Ryan said about the immigration showdown at the GOP retreat held in Cambridge, MD. "The substance of our document people really appreciated. It's just, like I said, the lawlessness of the White House makes us lose confidence that the President will enforce the laws," Ryan said.

What took place in the meeting has emerged as a point of debate among Republicans. GOP sources who participated in the meeting, both those who support moving on the issue and those who don't, said in the hours afterwards that about 80 percent of the lawmakers who spoke were against bringing a bill forward this year. Rep. Jeff Denham, from California and is someone who favors moving forward, said, "I would say that's ridiculous." The issue is complicated because some of the lawmakers who spoke in favor of the substance of the principles were not in favor of moving forward on legislation.

Still, conservative heavyweights like Reps. Tom Price and Jeb Hensarling came out strongly against moving forward, and the result of the meeting seemed to change Ryan's tone in the days afterward. One conservative lawmaker who said the meeting was deeply lopsided against bringing forward legislation in 2014 warned ‘Boner’, saying, "I think he is out for a walk with nobody tagging along." said Rep. Tom Cotton, a freshman member running for Senate in Arkansas said, "At this point I don't anticipate legislation will come to the floor." All I got to say is, from his lips to God’s ears.

‘Gang of Eight’ member Lindsey Graham, who just happens to be up for re-election this fall, said, "80 percent of Americans, if not 90, want to secure the border. So, lets say that for some reason the Obama administration backed away from what Congress mandated – fellow Democrats would get killed." He went on to say, "He's not running again, other people are. This scenario that he could just unilaterally back away from border enforcement and politically that not be damning to the Democratic party… the reason I know that we could move forward with securing the border is the Democratic party would get killed if they didn't."

Marco Rubio, who many, like myself, view as having stabbed his supporters in the back by joining up with the ‘Gang of Eight’, was a bit more pessimistic. Asked if the House should move forward in 2014, Rubio said, "That's not my role to give them advice on. They're working on what is a very difficult issue. The resistance they're running into is a lack of confidence that this president and the federal government will enforce the security measures no matter what they're written as." To me it seems as such an obvious no-brainer that we, the Republican Party, should make no moves on immigration until AFTER the next election.

REPUBLICANS AND IMMIGRATION REFORM…LET THE CAVING BEGIN…

When it comes to the need for immigration reform, the question that remains in the minds of millions of Americans is really a very simple one. And it’s one that asks, "Why is it, exactly, that we need some complex set of new laws regarding immigration, when we already have thousands of laws dealing with the issue, already on the books, that are simply not being enforced?" And let’s face it, why on earth should the American people believe that Republicans themselves believe any new immigration reform will be enforced? Also, how will we control the border moving forward given Barry's rather obvious history of ignoring our current immigration laws? There has already been legislation passed which directs a fence to be built, yet it hasn't been built. People in this country illegally are supposed to be deported when they commit crime, yet they aren't. They're not supposed to be here, but yet here they are.

And now we hear some less than encouraging news about how our very spineless Speaker of the Republican controlled House, John Boehner, is now expected to back step-by-step measures to revamp the country's immigration laws and in such a way that non-Tea Party ‘conservatives’ would be able to live with. Now our source for this bit of information is that same supposed ‘news’ organization that very recently, and in what was clearly a very transparent attempt to provide cover to both Barry "Almighty" and Hitlery Clinton, claimed the Al Qaeda had nothing whatsoever to do with the terrorist attack that resulted in the death of four Americans in Benghazi. That ‘news’ organization is, of course, The New York Times. Boehner has previously signaled that he would take positions, on the budget and on immigration , that run counter to those supported by the Tea Party faction, saying that it had "lost all credibility."

Boehner claims to still be against the Senate's immigration bill that was originally drafted by the "Gang of Eight". He has repeated, on any number of occasions, that it is far too sweeping a way to address the presence of the supposed 11 million immigrants said to now be in this country illegally. Boehner has said, "The American people are skeptical of big, comprehensive bills, and frankly, they should be." Going on to say, "The only way to make sure immigration reform works this time is to address these complicated issues one step at a time." And in sounding rather noncommittal, Boehner also said, "I think doing so will give the American people confidence that we're dealing with these issues in a thoughtful way and a deliberative way." But it would seem to me, and I’m just applying a little commonsense to the issue, what could be considered as being more deliberate than enforcing current and existing laws?

And something else that might indicate in which direction it is that Boehner may be inclined to go is the fact that he recently hired immigration specialist Rebecca Tallent who had worked for Sen. John McCain. It just so happens that Ms. Tallent is an advocate for the brand of immigration reform that is essentially nothing short of amnesty. A House majority that would consist Non-tea party Republicans and Democrats, could easily back a series of individual bills, after the 2014 primary season of course, that would grant legal status to, among others, agricultural laborers and those who were brought to the United States illegally as minors by their parents. It’s been said that House Republicans will discuss immigration reform at a retreat later in January. Paul Ryan, RINO and co-creator of the budget deal that hit up military retirees, is also expected to play a key role in articulating a Republican immigration strategy.

Boehner has repeatedly demonstrated a willingness to simply ignore the Tea Party Republicans in the House. And he has made it quite clear that he has absolutely no qualms about moving legislation through the House with a majority of Democrat support and just enough Republican support that would needed for passage. As just one example here, our national debt has increased $3 Trillion during his tenure as speaker. So my confidence level regarding his willingness to resist the passing of immigration reform that is both not needed, and that is nothing short of amnesty, remains very low. If Boehner truly wished to be thought of as being a leader, he would face this issue of immigration reform head on by declaring that new laws are not what’s needed here. That what is truly needed is for our government to begin enforcing all of the laws we already have on the books! That’s what a true leader would do. But then…

BOEHNER & CO…THEY’RE JUST NOT LISTENING…

You know, I suppose it’s one thing to be lied to by the likes of Nancy Pelosi and ‘Dingy Harry’ Reid, Hell it’s even become something almost to be expected, but I find it rather offensive to be lied to, repeatedly, by those who profess to be the watchdogs of our conservative issues. And I feel that in respect to this latest "budget deal", I have not only been lied to by those whom I have actually voted for, but I’ve also essentially been told that I have no credibility in making my feelings known. Apparently what I think is of no importance to our ‘leaders’ in Congress as they go about the business of passing whatever it is that they want.

And in having done so, Boehner & Co. should not be surprised by the backlash nor by the fact that conservatives are now busying themselves savaging the recently passed budget deal negotiated by Paul Ryan, RINO, and Patty Murray, Democrat. A deal that increases federal expenditures by $63 Billion during the next two years, breaching the $967 Billion spending limit set by the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA), in exchange for mythical future deficit cuts totaling and rather paultry $23 Billion. So in an age of $17 Trillion in debt, we’ve somehow been able to agree on cuts totaling $23 Billion over 10 years. Really?

In speaking of this deal, Heritage Action communications director Dan Holler said, "This deal is a step in the wrong direction. There’s no doubt about that." He went on to say, "I’m not sure there’s anything in this bill for conservatives to like." He said, "The Democrats should have been forced to live with sequestration levels. Republicans missed a huge opportunity to bring Democrats to the table to talk about major entitlement reform," adding that the Ryan deal "takes away one of the only pieces of leverage the Republicans had over President Obama and the Democrats. That leverage is now gone." And he’s 100 percent right!

"I just don’t get it," agreed Veronique de Rugy, an economist at George Mason University’s Mercatus Center. "Why would you exchange real spending restraint for nothing?" She said, "The most important thing – the most devastating thing – is that this deal blows the sequester caps. This is the one and only victory the GOP has had in restoring fiscal responsibility. It was a meek victory, but a victory nonetheless." What I can only assume is that the Republicans have absolutely no interest in taking the measures that we all know must be taken if we are to have any hope of addressing our growing fiscal mess.

Ms. de Rugy went on to say, "I think Paul Ryan thought it was more important to avoid a battle over the CR [Continuing Resolution], but if they can’t keep in place the sequester cuts, which are minor, how can we believe that first, they will actually go back and implement these cuts, starting in 2016; and second, that they can actually do the work that has to be done to reform entitlements in the future, which should be everybody’s highest priority?" She added, "It does raise the question of why on earth we should believe Republicans ever again." Her points are valid and are the very reason conservatives hate this deal.

That same sentiment was also echoed by Steven Stanek, a research fellow in budget and tax policy at the Heartland Institute, who noted that "no Congress can force a future Congress to do anything, so all we know for sure is that we’ll soon see higher government spending. Considering the dismal history of promises of future fiscal restraint, it’s a safe bet the promised long-term deficit reductions will never happen." Brandon Arnold, vice president of government affairs at the National Taxpayers Union (NTU), said "There’s very little in the budget deal for taxpayers." I’m no expert, but I think he’s being more than a little too kind here.

And it was also Mr. Arnold who said, "There is a lot of spending at the beginning, but the promised cuts will not occur until the very end, in years nine and 10." And he went on to said, "Congress has lost a ton of credibility after making a promise to cut spending just two years ago." Adding, "Now they’re promising to cut it nine years from now. That’s a hard pill to swallow. It would have been far preferable for them to do nothing, maintain the status quo and keep the BCA sequester in place." You know, Republicans insist upon making deals like this, spend now but cut later, much later. It’s ridiculous, because the cut NEVER materialize.

Christine Harbin Hanson of Americans for Prosperity (AFP), also took issue with Ryan’s assurances that the deal he negotiated does not raise taxes. She said, "One of our biggest concerns is that this is a massive increase in spending and uses a number of revenue raisers such as aviation fees and also shifting Medicare spending caps into the future." She also said, "These are really a fee in name only." Adding, "But these aviation fees are not going into a specific reinvestment area to improve our infrastructure. Instead, they will be used to fuel spending elsewhere in government. If it looks and smells like a tax, it is a tax."

And in choosing to throw what was really nothing more than a temper tantrum, Boehner made it very clear just who it is that possesses zero credibility. And it certainly isn’t the conservative organizations that he sought to take potshots at. And ‘RINO’ Ryan is no better. Ryan did nothing more than to look the American people dead in the eye and then lie to them, repeatedly, which makes him no better than Boehner or, for that matter, Barry "Almighty". This entire debt deal is a complete fraud. And now here’s the truly scary part, we’re now forced into pinning all of our hopes on the Republicans in the Senate lead by the stellar Mitch McConnell. Not a very encouraging scenario.

FINGER POINTING IS NOT THE SOLUTION…

There seems to be a bit of a shooting war, of sorts, that’s currently underway with the conservative activist group FreedomWorks now returning fire at House Speaker John Boehner, who said on Thursday that conservative groups have "lost all credibility" by they’re choosing to attack the budget deal that was reached by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA). According to Boehner, "This budget agreement takes giant steps in the right direction." He added, "But when groups come out and criticize something they've never seen, you begin to wonder just how credible those actions are." Now if I was Boehner I wouldn’t be to quick to call into question someone else’s credibility.

As most should now be aware, Boehner, first on Wednesday and then again on Thursday, chose to assail those conservative groups who chose to openly oppose the latest budget deal, accusing them of having crossed some line and losing their credibility. "This budget agreement takes giant steps in the right direction," Boehner said. "But when groups come out and criticize something they've never seen, you begin to wonder just how credible those actions are." Adding, "Yesterday when the criticism was coming, frankly I thought it was my job and my obligation to stand up for conservatives here in the Congress who want more deficit reduction, stand up for the work that Chairman Ryan did."

Meanwhile, FreedomWorks President Matt Kibbe said in a statement, "Speaker Boehner may not care about what fiscally conservative groups do, but grassroots Americans still care about what he’s doing in Washington." Mr. Kibbe went on to say, "When it comes to ‘credibility,’ actions speak louder than words. And right now, it looks like the Speaker is leading the charge for spending increases and recruiting Democrat votes in the House to help get it done." Which, personally, I think it is a pretty accurate assessment regarding what it is that we are seeing take place in the House. And I’ll be honest with you, from my standpoint it’s Boehner who’s currently suffering from a credibility problem.

In the past Boehner has always been hesitant to criticize conservative groups, such as Heritage Action and Club for Growth. Some of these groups have had a considerable influence on the Tea Party faction among House Republicans. Asked if he was officially saying "no" to the Tea Party, Boehner emphasized the deficit reduction achieved under the budget deal and said there was no reason to oppose it. "I came here to cut the size of government," he said. "That's exactly what this bill does, and why conservatives wouldn't vote for this or criticize the bill is beyond any recognition I could come up with." Boehner is being more than a bit disingenuous, even dishonest, in claiming to be a cutter of government.

In his choosing to sound off against Club For Growth, Heritage Action, FreedomWorks and Americans For Prosperity, Boehner said, "Frankly I think they're misleading their followers." Boehner also took the opportunity to defend his own ‘commitment’, or lack thereof, to conservative principles, which has repeatedly come under fire, especially when he has attempted to negotiate with Barry and congressional Democrats. He said, "I say what I mean and I mean what I say." Adding, "I'm as conservative as anybody around this place." But it’s important that we keep in mind here that under Boehner’s tenure as speaker, the national debt has now increased over $3 Trillion in less than 3 years.

And what should cause some additional angst is the fact that Boehner had ‘Dingy Harry’ Reid rushing to his defense. ‘Dingy’, who roughly a year ago was accusing Boehner of being a dictator, has praised Boehner for choosing to stand up to those evil conservative groups attacking the budget deal. At a press conference on Thursday ‘Dingy’ said, "I think it was a breath of fresh air as far as I'm concerned." And in referencing those outside groups, ‘Dingy Harry’ went on to ask, "Why are they doing this?" He added in what I’m thinking was an attempt to defend his own actions, "What is this supposed to accomplish? It is showing the American people why the [Senate] rules had to be changed."

To say the Boehner has been a disappointment, I suppose, will be seen by a majority of folks as being a bit of an understatement. Those of us, back in 2010, who had high hopes that were bringing some semblance of fiscal sanity to our nation’s capital have seen those hopes dashed, repeatedly. Our leaders in both Houses of Congress have demonstrated time and again that our priorities are NOT their priorities. And now when there exists a real opportunity for us to not only keep control of the House but to gain a majority in the Senate, what do we see our leadership doing? Trying their damnedest to be just like the Democrats. And I just don’t see how such a tactic will get us to where it is we need to be.

SO WHY IS BOEHNER STILL SPEAKER?

Over the course of my life there have been more than a few occasions where I have found myself wondering just how it was that someone was able to get their current job. Because it most certainly wasn’t because they knew how to do it better than anyone else. And it’s these days that I find myself wondering the very same thing about John Boehner. Because there are any number of other people in the House who would make a far better Speaker than Boehner. The man just does not possess the necessary skill set.

The latest thing that has me being more than just a little displeased with the guy is the fact that, on Wednesday, he chose to take a swipe at those conservative groups that "came out and opposed" the latest ‘bipartisan’ budget deal "before they ever saw it." It was while attending a Republican news conference that he whined, "They're using our members, and they're using the American people for their own goals. This is ridiculous." Adding, "Listen, if you're for more deficit reduction, you're for this agreement."

Now one of those "conservative group" at which Boehner seemed to direct his displeasure was The Heritage Foundation. Heritage said the budget deal "thoroughly disappoints," and the conservative group offers "three key facts on the sour deal": It busts through supposed spending caps; it taxes and spends; and it spends now and delays savings until later. It also noted that budget conferees failed to make substantive reforms to entitlement programs, which it describes as the real drivers of spending and debt.

Another such "conservative group" was Americans for Prosperity which said the deal reverses "hard-won bipartisan spending limits set by the sequester." It went on to say, "Spending levels were set by law at $967 billion. Exceeding those levels by $45 billion takes us in the wrong direction; further from fiscal responsibility, and further from the promise made to the American people." And another was FreedomWorks who urged a "no" vote on the bipartisan plan, saying it "is not acceptable to fiscal conservatives."

FreedomWorks went on to say, "The proposed plan would increase spending $63 billion above the budget caps set by Budget Control Act of 2011—the only actual spending control achieved by Congress under the Obama Administration. The deal claims to offset these costs by increasing various fees, and by making small reforms to government pensions. These new fees aren’t being used to shrink government or balance the budget; they’re simply a mask to help hide the breaching of the budget caps."

It was Paul Ryan, the RINO from Wisconsin, who led the Republican negotiations, and who said on Wednesday that the budget agreement "maintains 72 percent of the sequester in the next year and a half, and it preserves 92 percent of the sequester over the life of the sequester." And in sounding like he was only making excuses, he said Democrats wanted the sequester completely replaced, but "we didn't agree with that." He also emphasized the importance of finding "common ground" with Democrats.

Ryan went on say, "We know that this budget agreement doesn't come close to achieving what we want to achieve on our ultimate fiscal goals, but again, if we can get a step in the right direction, we're going to take that step and that's why we're doing this." However, this is such a small step, even a miniscule one, as to make it completely worthless. And regarding his comment about the importance of finding "common ground" with the Democrats, how about, for a change, they be made to find "common ground" with us?

So once again it is we who handed control of the House over to the Republicans back in 2010, and who then permitted them to hold onto it in 2012, who are the ones being knifed in the back. And I guess now they just expect us to do the same in 2014? But if I were them I wouldn’t be too quick to jump to that conclusion. Because if the outcome is going to be the same regardless of which party is in control, where’s the incentive for me to allow the Republicans to maintain their majority? It just doesn’t exist!

So here’s my question to Mr. Boehner: Just how badly do you wish to be permitted to keep your majority? And also, here’s a little word of advice for him: You might want to reevaluate your recent comments directed at those "conservative groups," because their criticism is well-deserved. And we the people are getting more than a little tired of being told to shut up and sit down, and that this is how things are going to be. I think it safe to say that Boehner is now on very thin ice, and his recent comments don’t help.

MORE ON THE VERY SQUISHY, JOHN BOEHNER…

So I ask you, just how useless do YOU think our illustrious House Speaker, John Boehner is? Personally, at this particular point in time I’d have to say that he’s pretty damn useless. For one thing, I seem to recall, not all that long ago, that he was making it sound like any move on immigration reform was pretty far off in the distance, if it was to happen at all. Then, just today, he was said to have bristled at the mere mention that immigration reform might be dead for the coming year. "Is immigration reform dead? Absolutely not," he told reporters at his weekly press conference. Such a comment should cause a little unease.

Boehner said that he is "hopeful" that the House can make progress on the issue, even though one of his top deputies recently said there is not enough time to hold votes this year. He said that House Republicans are still having private conversations on how to move forward, but stressed that it will address the issue with smaller individual bills rather than one sweeping bill like the one passed by the Senate. But he would not say when the House would vote on immigration reform legislation. Let’s face it, we have many issues that are far more urgent in they’re need to be addressed than is immigration reform.

And in a rare occurrence, Boehner praised Barry "Almighty" for reiterating that he’s open to passing an immigration overhaul in pieces, as long as every element of reform is included. "I was encouraged that the president said he wouldn't stand in the way of a step by step immigration reform," he said. "The only way to make sure immigration reform works this time is to address these complicated issues one step at a time." Naturally, immigrant advocates and Democrats have, of late, been doing their best to make Boehner into a whipping boy on the issue. Frankly, I’m more than a little surprised that he hasn’t yet caved.

Boehner drew fire for saying recently that he would not negotiate on the Senate's broad immigration overhaul, which includes a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. Demonstrators have picketed Boehner at his office and his home, demanding that he hold a vote on immigration legislation. The Speaker has also received internal pressure from some Republicans, who, rather naively, view immigration reform as being a key step in winning back Latino and Asian voters. That’s simply absurd. Let’s face it, If that were truly the case why would Democrats now be working so hard on getting legislation passed?

The bottom line here is that these days I trust very little of what I hear come out of Boehner’s mouth. Because anything that he says today stands a very good chance of being quite different from what he’s likely to say tomorrow. He’s like that guy you used see in one of the carnival’s side shows, ‘Rubber Man.’ I can only assume that he must think none of us are paying any attention. You know, there are any number of people who would be capable of doing a much better job than Boehner. I can only assume that they must not want the job. But I think it safe to say that if their country ever needed them, it needs them now.

FOR THE GOOD OF THE PARTY, JOHN BOEHNER SHOULD RESIGN…

Somehow when we, the American people, decided to take it upon ourselves to hand control of the House over to the Republicans, thus allowing allow John Boehner to become Speaker of the House on Jan. 5, 2011, I don’t think what we had in mind at the time was to have the debt of the federal government explode by $3 Trillion, or to be exact, $3,064,063,380,067.72. That, my friends, is more than the total federal debt accumulated in the first 200 years of the U.S. Congress, during the terms of the first 48 speakers of the House. So, in that regard, I’d say that old John has really outdone himself. Wouldn’t you?

That grand total breaks down to nearly $27,000, or $26,722, for each of the 114,663,000 households that the Census Bureau now estimates are in these United States. So what could have been purchased with that $27,000 in additional debt that each and every household, though no fault of their own, has now accumulated under Speaker Boehner. Well, that $26,722 would be more than enough to buy every household in America a minivan, considering that the manufacturers’ suggested retail price for a Toyota Sienna, according to autos.aol.com, is $26,585. (Some other models of minivans are significantly less expensive than that.)

Or, if minivan is not to your liking, or you happen to be more of a truck guy, that same amount also would have been enough to buy every household in America a pickup truck, considering that, according to autos.aol.com, a Ford F-150 carries a manufacturers’ suggested retail price of $24,070. The $26,722 the federal government has borrowed in the name of every single household in America since Boehner became House speaker would have been also enough to pay for three years of in-state tuition at your typical state college (minus room and board), which the College Board says now costs $8,655 per year (or $25,965 for three years).

But, instead of getting a shiny new minivan or a new pickup truck or getting three years of tuition at a state college, what exactly have Americans gotten in return for the $3,064,063,380,067.72 in new debt that the federal government has now accumulated since Boehner became Speaker? Well, what they actually got was an even bigger federal total debt that their children and even their grandchildren will be required to pay interest on, whether those children and grandchildren ever own a minivan, or a pickup truck, or even get the opportunity to attend college. All thanks to John Boehner

Based on what turned out to be quite a number of empty promises, the Republicans were provided with a pretty significant majority in the House of Representatives in the November 2010 elections. And on Jan. 5, 2011, that new Republican majority chose to elect Boehner as speaker. And at the close of business that day, the federal government's debt stood at $14,011,526,727,895.85. On Oct. 17, 2013, the most recent day reported by the Treasury, the federal debt was $17,075,590,107,963.57. That means that since Boehner became speaker, the federal debt has increased $3,064,063,380,067.72.

The Constitution of the United States, which seems to be getting pretty much ignored in this age of Barry, gives Congress the power to authorize spending and borrowing by the federal government. Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7 says: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law." Article 1, Section 8, Clause 2 says: "Congress shall have power ... To borrow Money on the credit of the United States." So unless the House, which Boehner leads, votes to give the Executive the authority to spend and borrow money, the Executive cannot spend and borrow. Which should be the end of the story.

Thus, all spending and borrowing by the federal government are the de facto responsibility of the House of Representatives that John Boehner leads. On March 1, 2011, the Republican-controlled House passed the first continuing resolution spending deal that Boehner ‘negotiated’ with Barry "Almighty". The $3,064,063,380,067.72 in new federal debt accumulated in less than three years under Speaker Boehner is more than the total federal debt accumulated from Rep. Frederick Muhlenberg of Pennsylvania, elected speaker on April 1, 1789, to Rep. Jim Wright of Texas, who resigned as speaker on June 6, 1989.

So what are we, the American people, willing to do about it? And I would recommend that we decide to tread carefully here, my friends, there’s no need to go off halfcocked or to bite our nose just to spite our face. But it has now become very obvious that something of a more drastic nature does need to be done. Especially now with the potential for ‘comprehensive’ immigration reform looming just over the horizon, that need for some sort of action has become all the more urgent. A plan of action needs to be devised, a plan, I dare say, that must not include any effort to encourage the forming of a third party. That would be self-defeating.

Instead, I think we can start by simply ignoring the many voices of those who comprise that crowd described as being the ‘Republican Establishment." Also we need to be far more discriminating when it comes to deciding whom we are willing to donate our hard-earned money to. On a more personal note, I stopped giving any money to the RNC, the NRCC and the NRSC sometime ago, because they simply insist upon choosing the wrong candidates to endorse. And let’s not forget that while 2014 doesn’t sound all that far off, it’s more than enough time for those presently in charge to do some pretty significant damage.

So there is literally no time to waste. I think that with this most recent capitulation by the Republicans, Barry may now sense weakness on the part of Boehner. And in sensing such weakness, I’m sure Barry is also now of the opinion that there may be no time like the present to start pushing for immigration reform that would be prove to be the most advantageous for the Democrats. Frankly, I find myself agreeing with Barry, which is a little scary, in that I just don’t see Boehner as possessing the necessary spine to prevent such reform from becoming a reality. And if he is unable to do, then he must be replaced by someone who can.