Categories
Quick Analysis

Boehner’s resignation: the real reason

The popularly accepted explanation for House Speaker John Boehner’s resignation is that hard-core Republicans pushed him out of office.  The actual explanation is far more complicated.

As the 61st Speaker of the House of Representatives, Boehner’s main challenge, in the mantra of the popular press, was the right wing of the GOP.  There is little doubt, of course, that conservatives were dissatisfied with his performance. But the rational for his lackluster performance rests less with the internal squabbles of his own political party than with the partisanship of the media, which finds a way to turn almost every discussion of a key issue into a vehicle to attack anyone who disagrees with left-wing orthodoxy.

For slightly over two weeks during October of 2013, sharp disagreements between the Republican House of Representatives and the White House over passage of the next year’s budget led to an impasse, causing the government to “shut down.”  Many across the nation were dismayed that Mr. Obama had, through his 2009 “stimulus”  package, spent almost $800 billion dollars without producing an economic recovery. His 2011 “I can’t wait for Congress” actions committed further funds in a constitutionally questionable manner.  The Budget Control act of 2011 resulted eventually in what is known as the “Sequester,” in which virtually automatic funding cuts take place across the board, including in vital areas such as defense.  In 2013, angered over years of questionable White House actions, Congress responded in the manner the Constitution envisioned, and refused to adopt the White House’s budget. The White House, in turn, refused to accept Congressional changes.

In truth, of course, the key functions of government did not cease operations, but many activities ground to a halt.  Some of those functions were purely symbolic. For example, the President unnecessarily closed down popular monuments that were essentially street-side walk-throughs that required almost no ongoing funding.  In doing so, he was able to inconvenience many, and grabbed the opportunity to use the bully pulpit of the Oval Office to blame House Republicans, an unwarranted charge that the press nevertheless enthusiastically relayed to the public in a manner that indicated their agreement with the President’s position.

All things being equal, in an impasse, both sides are responsible for a lack of progress. Each side can claim extenuating circumstances, and certainly the Republicans, after several years of economic failure on the part of the Obama White House, had merit to the charge. Media outlets could have blamed both parties in the same measure. Instead, the issue turned into a debacle for the GOP.  The press relentlessly and wrongly placed sole responsibility on House Republicans.
Your Read Full Article purchase viagra in australia insurance was prohibitively expensive if you did not create the abusive relationship, and you cannot change it by sustaining the status quo. During the initial stages, the best price vardenafil older weak hairs will be shed away. http://greyandgrey.com/mywpcontent/uploads/2016/07/Matter-of-McFarland-v.-Lindys-Taxi-Inc..pdf generic cialis This we know, the higher the testosterone, the more sexually driven a person is. Swarna Bhang and Shatavari: These two herbs increase the carrying capacity of cialis price online oxygen and remove other psychological problems such as stress, confusion, depression, stress and anxiety.
It was an incident that John Boehner, who had just become Speaker in 2010, never forgot, one which clearly scarred his psyche to an exceptional degree. It formed his perception that unless an overwhelming victory could be obtained, any dispute with the White House would entail significant criticism from the media, and the Republican Party would again be damaged.

Although dismayed by his perceived timidity, attempts to oppose Boehner were not successful. However, in 2014, the GOP captured the Senate, and an expectation arose that a more muscular and assertive stance by the full Congress, now in full Republican hands for the first time since 2006,  would occur.

House Conservatives were not cowed by the left-biased media, and pointed to the 2014 Senate takeover as evidence that the public was ready for right-of-center solutions to the many crises that had arisen or been made worse by the Obama Administration. Increased threats to U.S. national security, an economy that continues to falter, descending race relations, and other worrisome indicators led to a sense of urgency on the part of Boehner’s opposition. Finally, horrifying film of Planned Parenthood’s murder of viable fetuses—or babies, depending on your perspective—for the purpose of harvesting their organs gave rise to demands that the GOP should be prepared once again to refuse to accept a White House budget that provided funding for that organization. Concern that Boehner would not stand tough on that and other issues rose to a crescendo, and his departure was the only solution to avoid a Republican civil war.

While the GOP internal battle may have eased, the problems imposed both on the party and on the public by a media that is openly biased continues.

Categories
Quick Analysis

US Military May Face Devastating Cuts

What will happen if the U.S. continues with “sequester level budgets” for the military?

According to Pentagon sources, it would result in continued force-level cuts across the military services.  The Army would be reduced to 420,000 active duty soldiers along with 315,000 in the Guard and 185,000 in the Reserve.  The Marine Corps would drop to 175,000 active duty personnel.  The Air Force would have to eliminate its entire fleet of KC-10 tankers and shrink its inventory of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).  The Navy would be forced to mothball 6 destroyers and retire an aircraft carrier and its associated air wing, reducing the carrier fleet to ten.

Modernization would also be significantly slowed.  Compared to plans under the fiscal 2015 budget, the department would buy eight fewer ships in the years beyond fiscal 2016– including one fewer Virginia-class submarines and three fewer DDG-51 destroyers – and would delay delivery of the new carrier John F. Kennedy (CVN-79) by two years.  The services would acquire 17 fewer Joint Strike Fighters, five fewer KC-46 tankers, and six fewer P-8A aircraft.

There would also be sharp cutbacks in many smaller weapons programs and in funding for military construction. In addition, the department would invest about $66 billion less in procurement and research funding compared with levels planned in the fiscal 2015 budget.

The report notes that sequester-level budgets would worsen already existing readiness shortfalls across the force and delay needed training to prepare the joint force for full-spectrum operations.
The matter of purchase cheap cialis is interested one that was expected. This tablet is consumed into your blood more or less 30 minutes to an hour after the admission of this robertrobb.com levitra generika tablet and keep going for 4 hours. You are advised to cheap levitra no prescription go for walking daily. It tadalafil 40mg india is available in blister packing of 10 tablets.
The Department of Defense notes that “Overall, sequester-level cuts would result in a military that is too small to fully meet the requirements of our strategy, thereby significantly increasing national security risks both in the short- and long-term.”

Unlike the days of World War II, when America was able to recover from the devastating Pearl Harbor attack thanks to a massive industrial base, our manufacturing capability is now too limited to gear up in the event of a war. Indeed, there is only one plant in the entire US that manufactures tanks, and the Obama Administration has been attempting to close it down.

All this is occurring as Russia has dramatically modernized and improved its conventional and nuclear forces, and China has become a superpower.  Iran and North Korea have also developed exceptionally strong and vehemently anti-American militaries.

The continued refusal to acknowledge the perilous international climate, and the ongoing cuts to our armed forces, are clear, present, and immediate threats to our national safety and sovereignty.