[84rules]

I've maintained from the beginning that this was a stupid move on Boehner's part. Hopefully, the Senate GOP will force a correction to Boehner's mistake.

[MNJohnnie]

Normally I would point out the other side of the argument here that defends Boehner and explains why he did what he did.

However after seeing the slander job Karl Rove and the GOP machine is pushing about Constitutional Conservative candidate O'Donnell in Delaware, the GOP can find someone else to be in the trenches for it from now on.

[La Lydia]

I think Boehner has been beaten back into shape since that interview.

[MustKnowHistory]

Maybe I am stupid, but actually think Boehner was correct. It is my opinion that The Won wants everyone’s taxes to go up on January 1....he is about to drown in red ink and he needs every tax dollar he can get.

But Obama needs a scapegoat, so he spends 2 weeks demonizing John Boehner and then John Boehner goes on the Sunday show. They were hoping that he would provide the 10 second soundbite that would allow them to blame the coming tax increases on John Boenher. But instead of holding firm, he says he will take what he can get in the way of tax relief.

If they could have used John Boehner as the scapegoat, this issue would be over now. All taxes are going up and it is because of the evil republicans.

Because, Boehner appeared to waffle, this issue is still alive and the dems are still looking for a scapegoat.

[NordP]

I don't agree. I think he was disarming the Left (because they had all these commercials and a game plan to make it appear that Republicans are the party of No--which would have worked with the unknowing masses) by saying, "I'll take it...and come back for more!" Then, when all I mentioned came out in the limelight, the Left's plan was exposed. Now, on for all or nothing. I think it worked.

Karl Rove - I just don't get it, and I'm ashamed of it.

[No Truce With Kings]

Here is the point. At this point the Democrats control the House. They bring a bill to the floor continuing the Bush tax cuts for everyone earning less than $250K. The Republicans attempt to amend the bill to include all income levels. They fail. (This isn’t a given — enough Democrats might vote for the amendment for it to carry. But for this case, it fails.)

Now the bill — cutting taxes for some, but not all Americans — reaches the floor of the House for a final vote. The Republicans cannot stop that from happening in the House. (They can in the Senate, but not in the House.) How do you vote? Do you vote for the bill, knowing that it will help some people if it passes? Do you vote against the bill, because it does not extend all Bush tax cuts?

Remember, if you vote against the bill you give the Democrats two things they want very, very badly.

1. You give them a chance to campaign this fall claiming they wanted to cut taxes, but the Republicans voted against it.

2. If the bill fails to pass (and it will if the Republicans fail to support it) you give the government a lot more money to play with in 2011 as taxes get increased by more than they would have otherwise.

Those are two results that Obama would absolutely love.

Boehner gave the smart answer. Because that was the situation which he meant when he said he would support passage of a flawed bill.

[aruanan]

Obama's extravagance follows the huge amount of red ink splashed around by the Republicans when they were in office.

The guy's a little off about the "Republican" red ink. Look the trend of the deficits from 2003 through 2007:

[sitetest]

I think that Mr. Boehner is mostly on the right track. But at this point, he should have never spoken this sentence:

“If the only option I have is to vote for some of those tax reductions, I’ll vote for them.”

It vitiates the rest of his message, which is that no personal income tax rate should be allowed to increase on January 1, 2011.

If the Democrats were united, monolithic, holding firm, and thus actually creating political heat on the Republicans for “blocking middle class tax cuts,” the one sentence might be justified as showing that the Republicans AREN’T standing in the way of keeping tax rates from climbing for the middle class.

But heck, over 30 House Democrats are on board for keeping ALL the rates at their current levels for the next two years. Thus, the tactic should be to drive that wedge in deeper. Answer back to the whore Schieffer, “Well, Bob, I’m on the side of the only bi-partisan game in town, one signed on to by several dozen Democrat House members already - no tax increases for ANYONE. Are you against bi-partisanship?”

With that kind of growing Dem rebellion against increasing taxes on better-off folks, why negotiate with yourself?

[Spok]

RINO-itis is an infectious disease. I wouldn’t write Boehner off...yet.

[arthurus]

Alas! it is too late to dump him. Tar and feathers is all that is left. And this guy is apt to be the next Speaker. I hope all these freshman Republican senators will refuse to vote for him for Speaker.

[bmwcyle]

CBS' "Face the Nation" Sunday

Does any one watch this show?

[Vaduz]

“If the only option I have is to vote for those at 250 and below, of course I’m going to do that”?
Now if he said no I wouldn’t vote for it how many independent votes would go to the democrat side??.