Um…Wednesday’s bad…how’s Thursday?

August 31st, 2011 at 8:51 pm

OMG—Did Speaker of the House John Boehner really just tell the President he couldn’t meet Obama’s request for joint session on jobs next Wednesday?  According to Politico, that’s exactly what he did:

“House Speaker John Boehner threw a serious procedural brushback pitch at President Barack Obama late Wednesday — urging Obama to delay his hastily called Sept. 7 address to Congress by a day to avoid “parliamentary and logistical” problems.”

I understood that passing the President’s jobs plan was going to be a huge lift in the House, but this is a level of obstructionism well beyond that.  A very important part of the President’s agenda going forward will be to explain to the American people precisely who is standing between them and their jobs, paychecks, and living standards.  Rep Boehner and his House colleagues may have just made that explanation a bit easier.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

13 comments in reply to "Um…Wednesday’s bad…how’s Thursday?"

  1. Geoffrey Freedman says:

    And Eric Cantor wants to offset any new diaster relief spending with cuts in other programs.

    Just what someone who has lost their home wants to hear.

    The Republicans are a band of Tin Men without hearts.

    An Obama needs an infusion of courage.

    Would that I were the Wizard of Oz.

    Does America understand how crazy this all is?

  2. Jean McKinley says:

    I know that one has to pick one’s battles wisely, but is the President willing to go to battle at all? When does he stand up to all of this disrespect? Is ‘turn the other cheek’ really good for this country? Will independents actually see this as a desire to get along, or will they see the President as weak and subject to bullying, as I, a progressive, do?

    • Th says:

      I agree completely. He negotiates like a community organizer with no power instead of the landslide winning President.

  3. general c. san desist says:

    …Barry the Gelded, the clueless, the ill-advised & the henpecked…when will suffering the slings & arrows become a motivator.

    He is under the false illusion that making nice will move mountains. Last time I looked, dynamite was the tool of choice. Someone please toss the cajoneless a fuse & matches…or is it too late.

    Notice the neo-hearst (murdoch) rise in national interest lobbying through op-eds & talkback radio. This was tried in the ’30’s by Hearst & Luce…along with Hoover’s endless Commissions on Employment.

    The Conservative Brotherhood so wants to horsecollar the pres. with this economy even in light of the public polls showing that Bush wears that wreath…were are the weapons of mass distraction & why are they not exposed as ankle nippers oblivious to the facts.

  4. Jim Gonyea says:

    So the “debate” between the current pack of Republicans seeking their party’s nomination is a parliamentary problem for Congress? Well Boehner is part of the team that feels it’s the primary responsibility of Congressional leadership to prevent the President from being re-elected.

  5. readerOfTeaLeaves says:

    This news broke the same day that we have heard about large US based CEOs making more $$ than their companies paid in taxes. And that is *just* the CEOs.

    I am not being snarky when I say that I can’t quite conceptualize the GOP economic paradigms. Heaven knows that I have tried, but I can’t quite figure it out. They seem to believe that all productivity derives from ‘capital’; therefore, their logic is to concentrate capital via tax code and tax cuts.

    If this were actually true, the dot com era would have produced global opulence; instead, a lot of people threw millions in ‘capital’ at utter nonsense. Yet if evidence as blatant as the dot com bust, and frauds like Enron, have not made the GOP ask more fundamental questions about the nature of productivity and profit, then one wonders what it could possibly take for them to grapple with real economic questions.

    I have long been intrigued that the GOP appears incapable of meaningful discussions about public goods. Infrastructure is Public Goods 101.

    Larger global events and demographics are making public goods more critical: I see evidence of this at PIMCOs blogs, at FT, at all kinds of places that ignored infrastructure in the past.

    On a personal level, I was so completely horrified and revolted by the GOP hostage-taking on the debt limit in July that I simply seek to avoid news about them. I’m interested in solutions, and all they seem capable of serving are the same sound bite they’ve been spouting for years. Plus obstruction. Very sad.

    There are so many engaging, witty, creative thinkers writing about economics and biz that it’s beginning to feel like a very fervent time for new economic conversations. I really believe that those who take the high road and build better public systems will prosper.

    In 2007, for the first time in human history, more people lived in cities than in rural settings. This makes public infrastructure – especially transportation – important in a whole new way.

    In 2010, Apple overtook Microsoft in market cap -based on mobile devices and data services. The era of the desktop is over. Look at Google’s stats for Android adoption rates, and then realize that the new economic shifts are happening in a world where GOP economic paradigms are irrelevant – or worse. But don’t take my word for it — read Richard Bookstaber’s recent (brilliant) blog post about the nature of capital in a digital economy.

  6. Carol says:

    Obama operates in a world all his own. Why oh why didn’t he consult with congress – specifically boehner – before announcing his big night as if it were a done deal? Is it incompetence, arrogance – what?

    At the very least he needs to get rid of his political advisers, or at least put them on a task where they can do no harm.

  7. vicki says:

    It’s one thing to be able to show who’s “standing in the way of jobs.”

    It’s quite another to show the American people just who runs the joint. I am seeing, anecdotally, non-nerdy types seeing weakness.

    I don’t know *what* the hell to think.


  8. Larry Fleisher says:

    The concept of turning the other cheek is most admirable. i believe that he is turning the wrong cheeks.
    whoever is in charge of scheduling presidential events needs a new dayplanner,a pink slip and an escort to the door.

  9. Dick C says:

    I have to wonder if they get the TV Guide at the White House. Isn’t Wednesday a scheduled Republican Presidential Debate? Jobs are important, but that’s been true for the last two years.

  10. Jeff H says:

    And we get headlines like this from Huffington:

    “Obama buckles to GOP demands”

    I wonder sometimes when Ariana will officially return to her GOP roots (if she ever left). Everything seems to be a war that Obama loses. It’s not like he could force the GOP to do anything.

    The three most important things in political debates, in order of importance:


  11. TPCole says:

    I’ve been saying for awhile he needs fresh advisors. Whomever decided 9/7 was a good time to deliver the message set Obama up for this, but he did go along. It’s reckless!

  12. general c. san desist says:

    …at least we won’t have to suffer through the rebuttal speech…oh, wait, I hear they want the rebuttal aired first so as not to interfere with football.