LOL I know. Did you see Cantor hurrying down the hallway avoiding press questions? Doesn't look good for Boehner at this point.

Some of the old time (not far Right) Republicans (and media) truly seemed shocked at how abruptly this voting ended. They said Boehner basically said Merry Christmas and left.



TIS

Many are already writing up his Speakership's epiphet, I don't know if I'll go that far yet. But this was a screwup, him and that party in the House. Then again with all those Gerrymandered House seats, where members fear a primary challenge much more than the Speaker of the House (i.e. their friggin LEADER), he has lost them. And worse, at a critical moment in the Fiscal dick-off.

Now the President and his allies can claim ad nauseum that they tried, they made concessions, they did this and that, but the GOP can't even back tax cuts at their end of the bargain and thus are why we're going over the Cliff. Sure you can say similarly about the Left, but they didn't just implode and revolted so publicly against their leader tonight.

EDIT - Oddly enough Cantor earlier today claimed they had the House votes to pass it. Opps. Or...double cross? Is Cantor measuring the curtains in Boehner's office right now?

EDIT 2 - The right wing blogs are loving this fiasco.

That delusional disconnect from reality, I'm reminded of that anecdote that after Hitler declared war on America, Nazi Foreign Minister Ribbentrop phoned Galeazzo Ciano (Mussolini's Foreign Minister) and Ciano didn't understand why he was happy about this development.

Why the smile? Is he happy that he just double crossed his boss and might become the next Speaker? Or is he happy that the Jets have benched Sanchez?

Surprisingly, after this defeat tonight, the House GOP are leaving D.C. to go home. Two weeks ago they tweeted:



Are these people that politically deaf tone?

This might be an unpleasant Christmas for Boehner. It's time to get on board or get out of the way.

Many Republicans have modified their views on immigration, taxes on the wealthy, and we'll see them shift on gun control in the coming weeks. This will help in re-election in the 2014 mid-terms, and remove an albatross for 2016 where they'll field a new look/new feel, competitive candidate.

I too have reviewed the Congressional Budget Office's projections for 2013-22 stating that if the fiscal cliff is allowed to occur: "Over the next few years, projected deficits in CBO's baseline decline markedly, dropping to under $200 billion and averaging 1.5 percent of GDP over the 2013-2022 period." Thus if you listen to the Democrats' plan they make it sound like it's going to balance the budget.

If that's the case then why do we need to increase the debt limit to infinity and beyond? That's why I don't buy into these projections. Thanks to the Bush tax cuts and rolling back the Clinton tax rates, our Fed. Govt. Income tax and overall revenues actually increased for four straight years after their passage.

What SOME won't acknowledge is that 47% ($1.7 Trillion) of the Federal Budget is Social Spending. That's 85% of all Federal revenue. Unless you cut social spending AND defense by 50%, there can NEVER be a balanced budget, which means even more borrowing and a continued decline of our economic situation. We NEED to cut spending at the Federal level down to $2.0 Trillion per year... that's a reduction of $1.6 Trillion per year, not the BS fake cuts that amount to what -- $100 billion per year? The past spending of the "Greatest Generation" have essentially destroyed this country. GW Bush, Obama, and the "Entitlement Generations" have accelerated the decline.

John Boehner now has the lowest favorability ratings of any Congressional leader, he's now displaced Pelosi as the most unpopular leader on the Hill. She had held that rank for several years for Rasmussen.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/21/john-boehner-poll_n_2348477.html

Coup?

House GOP members circulate plan to oust Boehner

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/...to-oust-Speaker

EDIT - Is Paul Ryan going to replace Boehner?

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/20...hner-as-Speaker

I disagree. We're seeing a mini-civil war within the GOP between the establishment and the Teabaggers, who are too big not to be ignored, but too small to actually run the party. And you can't afford to alienate and lose both wings of the party if indeed you want to be the party's nominee for President.

Consider that "Plan B" fiasco the other night. It was simply Kabuki theatre, surely the Speaker in private explained that circus performance to them and why they need to stick together. Instead they listened to the base and party interest groups, and really really fucked Boehner, finally revealing him to be a rag doll and eroding their bargaining power against a united Democratic Party in an already fucked situation for them.

But no they don't believe that. Listen to those Teabaggers, they think they're sticking it to Obama. And that sound you hear is saner GOPers banging their heads on the desk (with glass of Scotch nearby) having to deal with these people trapped too deep in their little bubbles divorced from reality.

As for '16, consider this. On paper, Romney looked good as a candidate. But he pissed away the Latino vote when he killed Perry for being too soft on immigration (Perry's program was actually rather pragmatic). The fact that his camp felt he had to do this to win the nomination I think demonstrates the current problem.

Take Marco Rubio. He should be spearheading (at least as a figure-head) the upcoming immigration reforms and push for a comprehensive bill. Do what McCain did many years back, get himself associated with bi-partisan solution measures. Win back alot of those Latino GOP voters who switched to Obama by proving that he isn't the base, that he does understand them and will fight for some of their concerns.

But Rubio isn't, in fact he's keeping himself rather distant from it, weakly pushing for piecemealing reform. He does this because he's TERRIFIED of possibly alienating his party's base and get branded as being soft on Immigration. In short he's worried about white people, which is just silly. If he was to win the nomination in '16, he'll win their vote anyway but he (and his party) will lose the Latino vote.

A recent poll had him in front of the prospective '16 GOP field. And a good reason why is that half of his support came from self-identified Teabagger voters. Well that explained that goofy gaffe of his arguing the Earth isn't billions of years old, because he's already trying to appease the base.

I said this elsewhere, but Cubans and Mexicans are both "Latino" only as a technicality. Different regional politics, different backgrounds, different political/social-economical allegiances. They both despise each other for different reasons. New Texas Senator Cruz won despite losing the Texas Latino vote. He's Cuban, Texas Latinos are Mexican. Unless Rubio and his party seriously fight for those votes (alot which were formerly Republican) and not just repaint the old over the hill platform with a brown token face, they won't win. He won't win.

The Pentagon, which will be forced to cut its budget by 10 percent in the first nine months of 2013—that’s around $55 billion in spending—is preparing to tell 800,000 civilian employees to prepare to take mandatory leave without pay if no deal is reached. The Pentagon isn’t the only government agency that will be impacted if the cuts go into effect. Some companies that do business with the government—as well as other agencies—will have to lay off some workers.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324274404578211560844520282.html