Posted on 04/13/2013 6:34:26 AM PDT by bestintxas
On Thursday, in the midst of ongoing national debate over prospective gun control and comprehensive immigration legislation, House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said that he didn’t need the approval of a majority of his own party to move forward with legislation. Referring to the so-called Hastert Rule, named after former House Speaker Denny Hastert (R-IL), which dictated that House leadership not bring up any bill for a vote without the support of a majority of the majority party, Boehner said, “Listen: It was never a rule to begin with.”
Then, realizing the gravity of admitting that he could move without a majority of his own party, Boehner added, “And certainly my prerogative – my intention is to always pass bills with strong Republican support.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Yeah, with John McCain hiding in the closet peering through a slightly ajar door.
There, fixed!
Regards,
GtG
Boehner needs to sober up
” I’m personally beginning to wonder if the political class, those with the money and the power to campaign and make it into DC, were on the take from the beginning, since before the elections, and they knew once they were in, and once they could safely take off their masks, they become the ghouls they truly are.”
I no longer wonder. They sold us out.
They got together on a “booze boat”, and sold us out.
alternatively, Boehner’s visited one DC honeypot too many...
With you on that. As soon as the Supreme Court ruled on Obamacare and the dissent opinion was written by the same judge that wrote the approval opinion, all US law became null and void.
In fact right now DC is so corrupt, we cannot even legally give money to DC. Since Obama and Hillary have admitted to supplying material and money to Al Qeada in Syria and Iraq, it is now illegal to give money to DC. You would be guilty of giving money to an organization that supports terrorism with money and material.
That is how messed up it is right now. Reset button time.
The takers are not that smart. If obama had lost, they would have accepted that it was “the man” taking their guy out.
You think the LA riots after the King verdict were bad, or Chicago in ‘68? This would have been much worse. IMO
Remember the armed Korean shopkeepers and storeowners defending their property from throngs of looters?? The rioters backed off, immediately, when these shopkeepers *defended* their property.
Imagine if NJ residents could've defended themselves and their property against the Sandy looters in the same fashion.
Yes. Lots of wild cards here. But the more empowered the takers feel, th more it will take to get them to back off. And with the fervor over guns and ammo, and the incompetency of obama, those on the right are feeling pretty empowered. It *could* have gotten really bad. We’ll never know, though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.