The title of a recently released ABC News article is “John Boehner’s RARE (?) REBUKE Signals LINE IN THE SAND on Tea Party” (Web-site/URL: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/john-boehners-rare-rebuke-signals-line-sand-tea/story?id=21181714).
“House Speaker John Boehner’s RARE (?) public rebuke of conservative groups who oppose a pending bipartisan budget deal marks his clearest signal yet that GOP leadership has had enough of tea party-driven intransigence (stubbornly refusing to compromise)”. There are TWO things to note right off the bat. First, POLITICIANS OFTEN “rebuke” the public/ordinary folks AND EACH OTHER. Secondly, yes, Tea Partiers are STUBBORN & ARROGANT (Web-site/URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnAY_eXYbI).
“With his voice rising with ANGER during a news conference at the Capitol today (December 11 2013)”, Boehner said: “They’re (the Tea Party is) using our members and they’re USING the American people FOR THEIR OWN GOALS“. Again there are TWO things to note here. First POLITICIANS ALWAYS seem to be “angry”. On top of this, “using people for their own goals” is informally known as ARROGANCE (Web-site/URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnAY_eXYbI). This is RIDICULOUS. Listen, if you are FOR more deficit reduction, (then) YOU ARE FOR THIS AGREEMENT“. Unfortunately, however, as we know, this IS NOT how the Tea Party operates/does things. The Tea Party, as we know, is full of ANTICS.
“In response to Boehner’s comments, Club for Growth President Chris Chocola said his group will still stand with lawmakers who OPPOSE the deal“. “We stand with Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Tom Coburn, Rand Paul, members of the Republican Study Committee and EVERY OTHER fiscal conservative who OPPOSES the Ryan-Murray deal“. This “Club for GROWTH” sounds like the “Club for” NEGATIVITY. “We support PRO-GROWTH proposals when they are considered by Congress”.
According to Rep. Greg Walden, “The American people expect us to come here, FIND COMMON GROUND (?) and do the best we can, stick to our principles, but GOVERN. That’s what this (bill) has achieved“. The key word here is GOVERN. The last thing we need is ANOTHER GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN.
“Still, many tea party conservatives are expected to vote against the deal, including Rep. Tim Huelskamp, one of the House’s most FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE members”. “It is the typical end of the year deal I’ve seen from my three years up here (on Capitol Hill)“. HUelskamp was elected in 2010 (Web-site/URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Huelskamp), the year Republicans won 63 HOUSE seats in the Democrats’ HOUSE “shellacking”. “It’s going to INCREASE SPENDING with PROMISE OF spending cuts sometime in the future” and we know how good POLITICIANS are at keeping “promises”. They DON’T. “At the end of the day, it’s (this deal is) going to INCREASE the deficit, it’s going to RAISE taxes and fees and it’s NOT going to address the long term OVERSPENDING problem in Washington which is we need to REFORM ENTITLEMENTS“. This is all more TEA PARTY rhetoric/ANTICS.
“FreedomWorks, a grassroots organization that advocates for individual liberty and constitutionally-limited government, said Boehner’s real problem is “with millions of individual Americans who vote Republican because they were told the GOP was the party of SMALL GOVERNMENT and FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY“, more typical GOP and TEA PARTY rhetoric.
In a statement, FreedomWorks President and CEO Matt Kibbe REACTED: “Once again, Republicans, led by John Boehner, are working WITH Democrats to INCREASE spending yet again on the TAXPAYERS’ tab while PROMISING ‘savings‘ DOWN THE ROAD“. There are FIVE things to note here. First, the “Difficult Person” and the person who “reacts” are NO DIFFERENT THAN the other (Web-site/URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnAY_eXYbI). Secondly, “working with” the opposition/someone we disagree with is now BAD? OK, maybe it is given how POLARIZED we’ve become. Thirdly, “increase spending…on the taxpayers’ tab” is a ‘hot button’ issue for POLITICIANS. Fourthly as we know “promises” are often BROKEN or even NEVER KEPT (the latter is especially true for POLITICIANS). On top of this, when is “down the road?” FIVE years? TEN years? This time frame is EXTREMELY VAGUE. “We know how THIS MOVIE ends. How can leadership credibly promise spending cuts LATER, AFTER agreeing to a plan that ROLLS BACK the sequester savings promised two debt increases ago? There’s A PREDICTABLE PATTERN here“.
“House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said conservatives like Huelskamp should support the agreement because it does not raise taxes, it REDUCES the deficit and (most importantly), eliminates the worry of government shutdowns next year (2014)”. “We’ve got to find a way to MAKE DIVIDED GOVERNMENT WORK“. This still HASN’T happened because the emphasis is still on “divided” and when people are “divided”, they DON’T get along/like/want to work with each other. “We understand in divided government we’re not going to get everything we want”. Paul Ryan is a REPUBLICAN; Tim Huelskamp is a member of THE TEA PARTY. THERE’S CLEARLY A RIFT HERE.
“House Democrats also began to CAUTIOUSLY embrace the agreement, which Boehner indicated will likely come to the House floor for a vote Thursday (December 12, 2013) “, with the emphasis on CAUTIOUSLY.
“House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi stressed that her caucus has not had the opportunity to fully review the deal, but indicated she could vote for it”. “could” IS NOT a guarantee. More specifically, Pelosi said: “We would have preferred something QUITE different, but we do recognize the value of coming to a decision so that we can go forward with some clarity on other legislation that we want to see“, more specifically “closing TAX and IMMIGRATION reform as two legislative priorities she would have preferred to include in the package”.
Finally, “Rep. Nita Lowey, the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, CRITICIZED the agreement for CUTTING Medicare while also EXCLUDING AN EXTENSION TO UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS. Still, she admitted (that) the deal COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE“. “It is ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGEOUS that we should leave this Congress and go home for the holidays when too many people — over A MILLION people WILL NOT be getting their unemployment benefits. But I think this is the best that we can do AT THIS POINT“. In an argument, we must CONCEDE some points in order to NOT come across as ARROGANT (Web-site/URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgnAY_eXYbI).
To conclude: why did Boehner “rebuke” the Tea Party? We now have more evidence that the Tea Party is a FRINGE party of EXTREMISTS who WON’T accept any REASONABLE concessions.