John Boehner: Worst Speaker of the House ever, so far

Aside from being a cry baby, at the drop of a hat, Boehner must also have the testosterone level of a skinny 99 year old woman who has had her ovaries removed.
He can’t stand up to the crazies in his own party, and has thus placed the world economy in jeopardy, again, by joining them in the bid to defund the US government unless the Healthcare Law is defunded (without the ability to offer anything to replace it).

Aside from being a cry baby, at the drop of a hat, Boehner must also have the testosterone level of a skinny 99 year old woman who has had her ovaries removed. He can't stand up to the crazies in his own party, and has thus placed the world economy in jeopardy, again, by joining them in the bid to defund the US government unless the Healthcare Law is defunded (without the ability to offer anything to replace it).
It's a tragi-comedy. I think he is just afraid of losing his high profile job. He probably dreamed of "Speaker" for years. That's his biggest accomplishment. Now he can just ride it out. He just wants the prestige. He gets to be boss, and however the extremists want to run the show is ok. He's got no balls. Like you said. The crying thing is relevant in my book. He's always loaded too it looks like.

I never considered that he may frequently be inebriated. That could explain the frequent bouts of crying, as some people tend to get teary when they are drunk. I also agree that he is likely motivated by keeping his job, position, and prestige, more so than by doing what is right for the country.
But someone who lacks the chutzpa to do his job (especially when so much is at stake) is not deserving of prestige.

Sorry Tim, but to correct a bit of your first statemen, the small amount of testosterone in females is produced in the adrenal glands (the part sitting on top of the main gland), so you’d have to describe her as having had her adrenals removed rather than her ovaries. :lol:
While I agree with your evaluation of him, it appears that the difference between Congressional Republicans and Democrats is that the former are made up of wimps and crackpots while the latter are just wimps. :snake:
Occam

Sorry Tim, but to correct a bit of your first statemen, the small amount of testosterone in females is produced in the adrenal glands (the part sitting on top of the main gland), so you'd have to describe her as having had her adrenals removed rather than her ovaries. :lol:... Occam
See this study indicating that testosterone levels in older women is higher if they are obese, and lower in women who have and a hysterectomy with ovaries removed. http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/153/3/256.full But I could add that the skinny 99 year old lady with no ovaries, also had shriveled adrenal glands, and she would still have as much testosterone as Boehner.

Damn, that’s the problem with using information learned in a 1949 Zoology or Physiological Psychology class. I need to turn in my memory for a more recent edition. :lol:
Occam

has thus placed the world economy in jeopardy, again, .
Not to derail the thread, but it's impossible to ignore its relation to another recent thread] where TimB offered sympathy to communism. Yet here he is implicitly admitting that the capitalist tentacles of the U.S. support the world economy (or something). Just found it interesting. Carry on.
has thus placed the world economy in jeopardy, again, .
Not to derail the thread, but it's impossible to ignore its relation to another recent thread] where TimB offered sympathy to communism. Yet here he is implicitly admitting that the capitalist tentacles of the U.S. support the world economy (or something). Just found it interesting. Carry on. The world economy is tethered to China also. They're communists. Plus how would offering sympathies to communism in any way be contradictory to stating that the United States could place the world economy in jeopardy? I didn't see anything by Tim that stated that The US supports a world economy with tentacles...or something? Where's that? More word twisters and mis-quoters.
has thus placed the world economy in jeopardy, again, .
Not to derail the thread, but it's impossible to ignore its relation to another recent thread] where TimB offered sympathy to communism. Yet here he is implicitly admitting that the capitalist tentacles of the U.S. support the world economy (or something). Just found it interesting. Carry on. The world economy is tethered to China also. They're communists. Communists in name only. As I pointed out in that other thread, China instituted a market-based reform of its economy. People in China now have property rights that did not exist before, for example.
Plus how would offering sympathies to communism in any way be contradictory to stating that the United States could place the world economy in jeopardy?
Who said it was contradictory?
I didn't see anything by Tim that stated that The US supports a world economy with tentacles...or something?
Right. I didn't say Tim said anything like that. I said he implicitly admits it. He does that by admitting its central role in the world economy.
Where's that? More word twisters and mis-quoters.
Present company excepted, I'm sure. If this stuff interests you then pick it up in the other thread, please. If you pursue it here then it will tend to derail the thread. That's not my intention, and I hope you'll respect that along with the probable wishes of the person starting this thread. Thanks.
Communists in name only. As I pointed out in that other thread, China instituted a market-based reform of its economy. People in China now have property rights that did not exist before, for example.
Oh, says you? In name only. Unless the topic was the suppression of religion. Then I'm sure you would chime in with anti communist rhetoric. In name only....LOL.
Who said it was contradictory?
You did. That was the purpose of your post right there. I get counterpoint and comparative citations. I recognized that in your post. You gonna be a lackey and deny that?
Right. I didn't say Tim said anything like that. I said he implicitly admits it. He does that by admitting its central role in the world economy.
Oh good, here you are reaffirming my last statement. Admits what? What is he admitting if he says the US plays a central role in the world economy?
Present company excepted, I'm sure. If this stuff interests you then pick it up in the other thread, please. If you pursue it here then it will tend to derail the thread. That's not my intention, and I hope you'll respect that along with the probable wishes of the person starting this thread. Thanks.
You should have heeded your own advice. You're the one trolling around.

Brian, as to your off topic remarks. Communism is down the list of forms of government that I would like to live under. Though it is ahead of unrestrained Capitalism. There is no contradiction in this, in recognizing US influence on the World economy. I believe that Capitalism without rational restraints will ultimately lead to severe worldwide economic crisis.
And, segwaying back on topic, Bohner’s inadequacies in getting the House of Representatives to behave rationally and responsibly, is making it likely that the US and world economy will be adversely effected.

I see that Sarah Palin has recently called on Republicans to “Woman up.” and “Fight like a girl.” in their efforts to defund the Healthcare Act by holding the funding of the Federal Government hostage. Perhaps Boehner is taking his marching orders from her.

Yes Ladies and Gentlemen, you do in fact live in a nation where a large percentage of your representatives are actually fighting to
prevent you from receiving better healthcare.

I believe that best economic system is strongly regulated capitalism. The only situation in which communism would work is if there were no parasites, no predators, and no one had significant self-interest that affected the needs of the society in any way.
Occam

I believe that best economic system is strongly regulated capitalism. The only situation in which communism would work is if there were no parasites, no predators, and no one had significant self-interest that affected the needs of the society in any way. Occam
Not one single person advocated for communism here. That was just Bryan twisting people's words around. That's how communism came into this discussion.
I believe that best economic system is strongly regulated capitalism. The only situation in which communism would work is if there were no parasites, no predators, and no one had significant self-interest that affected the needs of the society in any way. Occam
Not one single person advocated for communism here. That was just Bryan twisting people's words around. That's how communism came into this discussion. When we talk about ecomomic systems, communism is bound to come up. It is an economic system and some people support it. When we discuss economic systems, sometimes we must talk about all of them, even the ones most people would reject. There is good reason to compare them and to understand why some don't work in the real world. Lois

I don’t know if he is the worst Speaker ever but he is the weakest and most impotent Speaker in my life and I have been arround for a while.

I believe that best economic system is strongly regulated capitalism. The only situation in which communism would work is if there were no parasites, no predators, and no one had significant self-interest that affected the needs of the society in any way. Occam
Not one single person advocated for communism here. That was just Bryan twisting people's words around. That's how communism came into this discussion. When we talk about ecomomic systems, communism is bound to come up. It is an economic system and some people support it. When we discuss economic systems, sometimes we must talk about all of them, even the ones most people would reject. There is good reason to compare them and to understand why some don't work in the real world. Lois Maybe sometimes, but I think a modified Godwin's Law was in effect here, like it often is.

Here’s an excerpt from an article by someone who apparently agrees with my views on Boehner’s weakness:
“…Boehner doesn’t want to make any great moral points. He wants to get the hell out of there, go to K Street, make a few million a year, and spend more time golfing. Taking moral stands can only impede that greasy path.
So Boehner will limp toward retirement. In all likelihood his legacy will be failing completely in his job as co-governor and ceding control of his caucus to extremists. And here’s the worst part: all of the above is the good news. The bad news? His successor will be far worse.”
For the full article: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/23/john-boehner-is-letting-gop-extremists-hold-the-government-hostage.html
It is scary to consider that a weakling like Boehner or a reactionary ideologue like his successor is bound to be, could become POTUS at any given moment, should something happen to the President and Vice-President.

Well, our congress can wrack up it’s first death as a result of this ludicrous governance by shutting down government.
I would not be surprised if this woman was facing total ruin because of this callous disregard of congress’ mandate to “serve the people”.
How much longer before we start calling these 30 or 40 anarchists who are responsible for this intentional disaster as “seditionists”?