Boehner: These conservative groups who are objecting to the budget deal are “ridiculous”

posted at 1:54 pm on December 11, 2013 by Allahpundit

Via Mediaite, between this and Mitch McConnell’s allies trying to blacklist allies of the Senate Conservatives Fund, I’d say the battle between the GOP leadership and righty PACs is now fully joined.

I think it’s silly to try to analyze whether a deal that would reduce the deficit by just $28 billion — over 10 years — is “good” or “bad.” When the stakes are that small, heated arguments over whether it’s a step in the right or wrong direction are like challenging the spot on a one-yard run when it’s third and long and you’re pinned at your own 10-yard line. Who cares? Every inch matters, I guess, but the odds of scoring on the drive will barely change if the spot’s three inches one way or the other. What this deal really is for leadership is the Shutdown Prevention Act of 2013. They’re terrified that if there’s another budget standoff next month and the government goes unfunded again, all of the anti-ObamaCare momentum that the GOP has built up against Democrats right now will disintegrate. Avoiding that is their top priority, so they agreed to swap policy gains for political ones: In return for the GOP agreeing to undo some sequester cuts and accept certain “user fees” (a.k.a. taxes), Democrats agreed to some very modest entitlement savings in the distant future and, more importantly, to funding the government so that Republicans can’t be demagogued during another shutdown.

If you want a more thoughtful take than that, try Yuval Levin, who thinks this was a not-entirely-terrible bargain by Republicans under unfavorable circumstances, or Phil Klein, who thinks it was indeed pretty terrible. Levin’s argument, boiled down, is simple: You’re not going to get anything meaningful done with Democrats in power so make sure at least to avoid a shutdown and bank whatever mandatory spending cuts you can, if only to set a precedent. Klein’s argument is also simple: If it’s setting precedents we’re worried about, how about the precedent of undoing sequester cuts now for vaporous entitlement cuts circa 2022 that might never happen? Fair points in both cases, but again, it’s because the stakes are so small that the deal needs to be analyzed in terms of its symbolic value. E.g., would GOP leaders rather agree to a bad deal on spending that takes the shutdown option away from tea partiers or hold out for a better deal on spending that leaves tea partiers with leverage? Whom do they fear most?

Which raises another question, as framed by Ben Domenech on Twitter this afternoon: If you’re Boehner and you know your base is going to dislike the terms here, why antagonize them by sneering at how “ridiculous” conservative PAC opposition is? Noah Rothman from Mediaite countered that maybe that’s deliberate by Boehner, to signal to independents who have warmed to the GOP in the aftermath of the O-Care meltdown that the party hasn’t been captured by tea partiers. Could be, but the nastier leadership gets, the greater the risk that tea-party conservatives in the House will revolt against the deal. (They already seem to be leaning that way.) That’s not fatal to Boehner — obviously, a bipartisan compromise is designed to pass with Democratic votes too — but some liberals will walk here because of the mandatory spending cuts later. The more upset there is in the GOP caucus, the greater the risk that the whole thing implodes. Where that leaves Boehner — and Paul Ryan — if it does, I don’t know.

Exit question via Matt Lewis: Did the failure of the “defund” effort make this deal possible? You only get one shot at a shutdown, realistically, before centrist Republicans decide they’re not going to be dragged along on another wild ride that risks further damaging the party’s brand. Between their weariness at the thought of another shutdown next month and everyone wanting to get home for Christmas, Boehner will probably have more support than we think.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

It’s pretty simple, really. Propose a real budget, significant cuts, etc. The dem’s of course will fly off the handle. So offer a week long continuing resolution until they agree. They won’t. So then offer another weeklong one at 95. Then at 90, Then 80, and so forth. Eventually they will cave. And if they try to blame the republicans, say that they offered them the chance to avoid it. How can they quibble about a 5 % cut, when Obamacare is a wasteful disaster, and the people know it?

But then, that would take a party with brains and a desire to cut spending. Too bad we don’t have one.

The budget agreement announced yesterday increases spending, raises taxes, and funds Obamacare for two years. It has the support of President Obama, Harry Reid, and countless Democrats in Washington.

What is Mitch McConnell doing to stop it? Nothing. In fact, McConnell was completely silent on the deal yesterday.

Mitch McConnell may vote against the deal so he can pretend to be a conservative, but don’t be fooled. He wants the deal to pass. He made it clear that he won’t fight the Democrats on spending and he forced his party to surrender.

It’s so disappointing because now is the perfect time for Republicans to take a stand against Obamacare. The law is very unpopular and Democrats are running for cover. In fact, Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) just started a new TV ad distancing herself from Obamacare.

Thanks to your willingness to fight this terrible law, we’re winning the debate. But the law isn’t going to repeal itself. That will only happen if Republicans take a principled and courageous stand to stop it.

Ted Cruz and millions of Americans were right when they called on Congress to defund the law earlier this year.

Boehner-get this straight.You pander to everybody except the people that give you money,time and votes.Conservatives have taken enough of your crap.You are now our public enemy #1 and we will do everything we can to destroy your political career!

I don’t like the deal either but I don’t know what kind of a deal you guys think we are going to get when the dems control the senate and the white house. As for the commentor who said to offer CR’s every week until the dems cave and the repubs won’t be blamed I wonder where you were during the shutdown when the repubs kept making offes that were automatically refused by the senate and the white house and the repubs still got he blame for it. How do you suppose it would turn out differant now?

What this deal really is for leadership is the Shutdown Prevention Act of 2013. They’re terrified that if there’s another budget standoff next month and the government goes unfunded again, all of the anti-ObamaCare momentum that the GOP has built up against Democrats right now will disintegrate. Avoiding that is their top priority, so they agreed to swap policy gains for political ones

You know what? I’m pragmatic enough(in spite of my status as a Tea Partier) to be down with that strategery. Obviously the GOP has to retake the Senate in order to have any chance of meaningful reforms and spending cuts. After all, they’re faced with the kind of rigid ideologue in Harry Reid who has a meltdown on the Senate floor when someone proposes cutting funding for cowboy poetry festivals.

But here’s where Boehner loses me. Let’s say the polls don’t improve for the Dems over the next 11 months(which is a likely prospect). And the Republicans win back the Senate(and obviously hold onto the House). Hell, let’s be optimistic and say they pick up 9 or 10 seats and basically reverse the current makeup of that chamber. Then what? Obama is still President and the GOP is a dozen seats shy of a veto-proof majority in the Senate. What are they prepared to do at that point to cut spending, roll back Obamacare, reform entitlements, curb the abuse of executive power, limit the appointment of radical judges, and so on and so forth?

If the Republicans had given me anything over the last 3 years, I’d feel a lot better about this budget agreement. Instead, they’ve taken the one concession in spending from the Dems in recent memory(the sequester) and given it away, while raising taxes(under the euphemism of “user fees”), and are trying to sell it to a weary distrustful base by having the Speaker publicly trash conservative groups. Sorry, but color me skeptical.

All of this wailing and gnashing of teeth over such a minor deal. Can’t we be happy that so little damage was done at a time when 1) the GOP controls only 1 house and 2) the GOP has made themselves so extraordinarily non-grata with the public after that stupid shut down?

Well, it won’t but that doesn’t make it a good deal. We should not be lifting Paul Ryan on our shoulders and handing him the MVP trophy. We should not be silent in our “criticism” when the GOP elite pass these edicts as if they came from God.

Apparently Boehner has at least one primary challenger. I don’t know anything about him yet. The best thing we can do for the American people, not to mention the Republican Party, is to send McConnell, Boehner, Cantor, Paul Ryan and others packing.

Which raises another question, as framed by Ben Domenech on Twitter this afternoon: If you’re Boehner and you know your base is going to dislike the terms here, why antagonize them by sneering at how “ridiculous” conservative PAC opposition is?

Also, I think he’s assuming Obamacare is so bad that Republicans will have no choice but to support him no matter what he does to us, including amnesty. I think we’re looking at a full blanket amnesty come January.

All of this wailing and gnashing of teeth over such a minor deal. Can’t we be happy that so little damage was done at a time when 1) the GOP controls only 1 house and 2) the GOP has made themselves so extraordinarily non-grata with the public after that stupid shut down?

Be content that it wasn’t a whole lot worse.

MJBrutus on December 11, 2013 at 2:15 PM

So the GOP is “extraordinarily non-grata” over the shutdown but Dems aren’t after the ObamaCare flameout?

All of this wailing and gnashing of teeth over such a minor deal. Can’t we be happy that so little damage was done at a time when 1) the GOP controls only 1 house and 2) the GOP has made themselves so extraordinarily non-grata with the public after that stupid shut down?

I hope Rush sides with the tea party on this, but his show today doesn’t seem promising. He seems to be mostly avoiding the topic altogether, talking about selfies and time-magazine MOTY instead, and what little he said made it sound like the GOP establishment had a boo boo and accidentally made a mistake because they’re afraid. No mention at all that the true cause is that the GOP is corrupt and is serving their cronies.

If you’re Boehner and you know your base is going to dislike the terms here, why antagonize them by sneering at how “ridiculous” conservative PAC opposition is?

The Weeping Boner has been doing exactly this since he was first handed control of the House by the Tea Party in 2011. Why should he stop now? He was a total douchebag failure, attacked the Tea Party and colluded with Barky and the America-hating dems … and was re-elected Weeper in 2013, anyway.

Being a moronic, traitorous, backstabbing douchebag has worked well for the Crybaby moron.

The main problem here is if you are willing to forgo the hard won sequester cuts then how is there any credibility that any reductions will ever occur? This plan calls for reductions in the future but we know as the time gets near, just like with the sequester cuts, they will be pushed further down the road, over and over. The bottom line is that it’s painfully clear that Washington is completely unable to cut anything or even reduce the increases.

All the squeaky wheels. What about the “silent majority?” If Boehner does something like pushes amnesty, we would have to burn the house down to get him out of there. But I was really hoping to keep the spotlight on Obamacare, so we can win big in 2014 and 2016 so we can repeal Obamacare and make real significant libertarian style changes to the nature of bloated federal beast. Not another extended episode that makes Republicans look terrible. Not all kinds of undue primarying of Repubs that puts in poorly screened and inexperienced extremist candidates that will lose.. especially in the senate that we have to win! No more Bucks, O’Donnells, Akins, Murdochs etc. So I was kind of hoping somehow we’d get beyond the budget issue now, beyond shutdowns and squeaky squabbling. I don’t even know what the budget deal is, but I know that there are squeaky wheels and there’s a much bigger silent majority that at some point is going to be fatigued by this constant never ending budget fighting and infighting. Pick our battles, don’t overfight the small battles that are going to make us lose the war. Win the elections, so we can make our own budgets and big reforms. No more. No mas. Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe this deal is just so horrible that it’s worth risking it all. I don’t know.

What a load of hooey. The GOP leadership and GOP centrists never wanted to use the shutdown as a bargaining chip. They whined about it being done at all. They whined it distracted from the ObamaCare meltdown. That’s still the case.

I don’t think fighting over small changes in this or that will mean much, because even the sequester did not accomplish very much in term of fixing the country’s economic problems. So keeping it or not keeping it really means very little in that struggle. I dislike Weeping John because he is weak, and Paul Ryan is not exactly the best negotiator either. He could have gotten a better deal, but is it worth taking the eye of ObamaCare to get into another big shutdown battle now over small time stuff, none of which will solve anything significant?

Right now I would say no and I was and still am a big supporter of the first shutdown. Why? Because it was about ObamaCare. Now if we want to shutdown government over ObamaCare again, I might be for that. I am sure mods and RINOs would disagree with that.

My view is as long as whatever we do is about ObamaCare, keep doing it. As for the moderates and RINOs…same goes for immigration reform. Don’t do it. Stay focus…

“They’re using the American people for their own purposes. This is ridiculous.” – Boehner

Boehner, Boehner, Boehner… no one can “use” the American people. Your statement is what’s ridiculous.

No one can “use” the American people more than the current administration and their press lackeys. If they had really been able to “use” the American people, the Dems would not have lost the House in 2010 and you would not be speaker.

Agree with Doomberg. The surrender weasels demanded a complete cave to end the shutdown. I believe the phrase from Ed was “live to fight another day.” Well the defund/delay camp was proven right. Yet, the very issue where promises were made that the GOP would fight for conservative principles arrived with Boehner sneering at anybody that objects to a deal that has been enthusiastically embraced by Obama and Reid.

MJBrutus- Go join the Dems or STFU if you refuse to fight the enemy. Some hills are worth dying on. Shutdown was one of those and this secondary cave proves that your camp doesn’t want to fight for conservative principles ever.

There is a pox on everyone’s house. Sadly the GOP screwed up so badly, thanks to the shutdown among other blunders, that they are unable to exploit the Donkey’s failures the way they should.

Sorry, but until the R’s win elections they are doomed to playing defense and this deal is an example. I congratulate Ryan on limiting the harm to a mere $200 million/per year.

Here’s a thought. Rather than focusing on purifying the party and pushing away all but the fanatical faithful, why don’t we think about, you know, broadening the party’s appeal? Elections are won, after all, by those who get the most votes not those who get fewer but more enthusiastic votes.

MJBrutus- Go join the Dems or STFU if you refuse to fight the enemy. Some hills are worth dying on. Shutdown was one of those and this secondary cave proves that your camp doesn’t want to fight for conservative principles ever.

Happy Nomad on December 11, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Ain’t gonna happen. I’m not shutting up and I’m not going anywhere.

You may find a glorious, futile, last act of defiance suits you. It doesn’t do a thing for me. I find winning to be much more to my liking.

Correct me if I’m wrong but as I recall you are a big fan of the progressive War on Drugs and want to double down on it. Does this bill increase funding to anti-drug cronies as it does to warfare and welfare cronies?

It’s not the least bit surprising that authoritarian, progressive, big-gov Republicans are happy with this deal. America is being ruled by an extremist minority on the far-left and far-right and the tea party still has a lot of work ahead.

I don’t like the deal either but I don’t know what kind of a deal you guys think we are going to get when the dems control the senate and the white house.

Why did they have to do anything? We already had the sequester level spending in place that capped spending at the ridiculously high level of $967 billion. That is still 50% higher than when Obama came onto the scene and all budgeting stopped and spending was set by authorizing CRs the bloated rate. A compromise would not have had spending go up, it would have been negotiating what to spend at that level or less.

Who was the guy around here that voted for Obama to hasten the fall? HondaV65? He may have been onto something.

By all means, I would love to correct you. I am STRONGLY opposed to the stupid war on drugs. It takes a back seat to nothing, aside from the wars on poverty and terror perhaps, for compromising our rights and justifying an explosion of government scope and intrusion on our lives.

I don’t like the deal either but I don’t know what kind of a deal you guys think we are going to get when the dems control the senate and the white house. As for the commentor who said to offer CR’s every week until the dems cave and the repubs won’t be blamed I wonder where you were during the shutdown when the repubs kept making offes that were automatically refused by the senate and the white house and the repubs still got he blame for it. How do you suppose it would turn out differant now?

paulrtaylor on December 11, 2013 at 2:11 PM

CRs are better than this piece of human excrement disguised as a “compromise.” Plus sequestration has actually be shown to be an effective budge cutting tool.

But thank you for outing yourself as another liberal Socialist Surrender Monkey disguised as a RINO.

One congress cannot bind its own hands, let alone bind the hands of a future congress.
This means that there is no $85 Billion in future cuts to offset the immediate and certain $65 Billion in extra spending.

By increasing spending by $65 Billion, leaving out unemployment insurance and a few other items they likely will tag an extra hundred billion to, they are in fact increasing the deficit by $414.6 Billion over ten years.

We all know how these games are being played, and here we have our own Hot Air, supposedly CONSERVATIVE blog, eating the horse manure whole and arguing it is pure Kobe Beef with certificates.

I hope Rush sides with the tea party on this, but his show today doesn’t seem promising. He seems to be mostly avoiding the topic altogether, talking about selfies and time-magazine MOTY instead, and what little he said made it sound like the GOP establishment had a boo boo and accidentally made a mistake because they’re afraid. No mention at all that the true cause is that the GOP is corrupt and is serving their cronies.

MJBrutus- Go join the Dems or STFU if you refuse to fight the enemy. Some hills are worth dying on. Shutdown was one of those and this secondary cave proves that your camp doesn’t want to fight for conservative principles ever.

There is a pox on everyone’s house. Sadly the GOP screwed up so badly, thanks to the shutdown among other blunders, that they are unable to exploit the Donkey’s failures the way they should.

No one even remembers the shutdown now except the political media. It had the same impact that Newtown did – a short term drop in the bucket which panicked our “representatives” into nearly giving Obama a big gun control victory. Less than a year later the Democrats have begun losing seats in Colorado over it.

The shutdown is just an excuse from tax & spenders like yourself who want to be rid of the sequester, and need a convenient excuse to do so.

Sorry, but until the R’s win elections they are doomed to playing defense and this deal is an example. I congratulate Ryan on limiting the harm to a mere $200 million/per year.

We won in 2010. Nothing happened. I wager the new excuse will be “Obama is just too powerful” or “we don’t have a supermajority” if the Republicans win the Senate.

Here’s a thought. Rather than focusing on purifying the party and pushing away all but the fanatical faithful, why don’t we think about, you know, broadening the party’s appeal? Elections are won, after all, by those who get the most votes not those who get fewer but more enthusiastic votes.

MJBrutus on December 11, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Here’s a thought. The Republicans should focus on blocking the Obama agenda like they were elected to do – you know, the reason they won the 2010 elections – instead of stampeding off the cliff like mooing cattle every time a Democrat makes a frowny face in their general direction.

Here’s a thought. Rather than focusing on purifying the party and pushing away all but the fanatical faithful, why don’t we think about, you know, broadening the party’s appeal? Elections are won, after all, by those who get the most votes not those who get fewer but more enthusiastic votes.

MJBrutus on December 11, 2013 at 2:27 PM

Code for “expanding government, but just smarter than the Dems do it”. Worked so well for Bush, didn’t it?

Besides, the party’s appeal is supposed to be about keeping government limited and people getting to keep more of their hard-earned money. All I see of our party “betters” is more spending and, now, tax increases (oh, that’s right, they’re just “user fees”).

And here I thought all the conservative idiots had agreed that last month’s shutdown did NOTHING for the cause. Now they want to court another one?

Republicans certainly are consistent. You can’t fix STUPID!

GarandFan on December 11, 2013 at 2:35 PM

Well what if we shut down the government over ObamaCare again…

DO you think the Dems would want Round II focusing on something American people now have seen and don’t like? Be careful libs, the people have turned against ObamaCare and Obama, your not fighting from a position of strength on that issue anymore.

See this is where the GOP does mess up. Ryan should have made a bigger deal about ObamaCare and a possible shut down in negations. Dems might not be hot for another round of the ObamaCare Wars right now.

The premise is so patently stupid, idiotic, paternalistic, and another swindle by the BOP (Bankrupt Ol’ Party), establishment:

We will raise taxes and revenue now by $68B in exchange for unknown cuts and deficit reduction of $28B in 10 years.

Throw them all out. Anyone who votes for this. No ethics, no values, no economics, no balls. Cowed into acquiescence by a hard-core leftist when you have the power of the purse.

Starlink on December 11, 2013 at 2:06 PM

Some of you people are too hilarious. It’s been obvious that many Tea Partiers lack an adequate education, but the low information voter now reigns supreme?

You can’t embrace austerity spending cuts in the wake of a massive, once in a generation financial crisis when the economy is still trying to recover from a historic collapse in asset prices. For hose who lack an understanding of basic economics, the policy of spending cuts as a response to sluggish growth has never had a pleasant ending. Most Wall Street economists pegged a 1% to 1.5% cut in GDP as a result of the sequester, which correlates to millions of jobs suppressed and never created.

The time to balance the budget is when the job market has recovered and GDP growth is back on track. At that time, the deficit will naturally start to fall as a simple consequence of higher tax revenues. And perhaps the GOP will actually have the political muscle to force spending cuts, as opposed to control of only the Congress.

Apparently Boehner has at least one primary challenger. I don’t know anything about him yet. The best thing we can do for the American people, not to mention the Republican Party, is to send McConnell, Boehner, Cantor, Paul Ryan and others packing.

I live in the district just south of Boehner’s district. SW Ohio seems to have a fair number of tea party groups, and two or three of them are in Boehner’s district. They hate him, and I think two or three people are lining up to run in a primary against him. I don’t know who they are. I wish the sheriff in the most populous county in his district would run. Salty guy in his late 50s who’s the Midwest version of Joe Arpaio. He’s tried to give Boehner an earful on illegal immigration–and this is a county in SW Ohio for crying out loud. In that county (Butler), illegals really drain the local governments of a lot of resources. It’s a pretty conservative district, and they hate paying taxes up there–school levies often lose up there. If a good GOP candidate along the lines of Brad Wenstrup, who primaried Jean Schmidt (yes, a weak Congresswoman), surfaces, Boehner could be in trouble. I don’t know who likes Boehner in his district, but I think they’re finally tired of him.

The time to balance the budget is when the job market has recovered and GDP growth is back on track. At that time, the deficit will naturally start to fall as a simple consequence of higher tax revenues. And perhaps the GOP will actually have the political muscle to force spending cuts, as opposed to control of only the Congress.

bayam on December 11, 2013 at 2:41 PM

And, of course, you will tell us that when GDB growth is on track, and the Job Market is supporting 3.5% unemployment that the time to balance the budget is when the GDP is sluggish and unemployment is high. (like you did in the ’90s)

See this is where the GOP does mess up. Ryan should have made a bigger deal about ObamaCare and a possible shut down in negations. Dems might not be hot for another round of the ObamaCare Wars right now.

William Eaton on December 11, 2013 at 2:40 PM

I’d love to see the Dems fight defund/delay after all that has transpired since they defended it during the shutdown.

The democrats march in lockstep. Even during this obamacare mess, they never come off their talking points.
I see Boehner’s issue with the conservatives. They are principled, they were sent to Washington to fight the scourge of democrat socialism, and they are doing that job.
Mitch too. They both need to be out on their ears.

Many GOP members — including deficit hawks — are livid with the conservative groups demanding they walk one plank too many in October. And I concur. We were in a hole and they demanded we kept digging.