What did the speaker of the house John Boehner do to America and to democracy?
Asked by
flo (
13313
)
April 29th, 2016
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
33 Answers
How is that interference in the electoral process? Everyone’s free to offer up their opinions of the candidates. If that’s interference then so is an endorsement.
That isn’t interference in the electoral process, it i the voice of truth from someone who has first hand knowledge about Ted Cruz. And this being the U.S., he has a right to speak out about candidates.
He called Ted Cruz that because Ted Cruz is an evil sorry little man, who thinks he has some divine guidance to be President. That’s as evil as possible.
Former Speaker of the House. Boehner is now a private citizen and free to say anything that the law allows.
@ibstubro I think still calling him Speaker is acceptable. Once you get that sort of title I’m pretty sure you keep it for life unless the rules have changed since I learned them.
It unfortunately fell to Boehner, the product of a bygone era, to preside over a crowd of politically born again Republicans who by comparison make cat herding an exercise in close order drill. And right out in front of the keystone cops was Ted Cruz, a man so bizarrely twisted that Chubby Checker himself would gawk in disbelief. I can see Boehner’s point in that Cruz & his ilk made the man’s life a living hell, but even the devil would be insulted at the stupidity in the tranparent evil of Cruz & his crowd hell bent on driving the country over the cliff of obstructionism.
I disagree, @JLeslie. It’s acceptable to address Boehner as “Mr. Speaker” as he is a former Speaker of the House.
George W. Bush is Mr. President, but he is not President of the United States.
I make the distinction because The Speaker of the House has no little influence in America and bears some responsibility to comport himself with decorum. John Boehner has no such constraints as a private citizen. He can no longer be deposed by a vote of his peers.
What he can “do” to America and democracy is limited to the power of a private citizen which, quite frankly, is little.
@JLeslie; The house of representatives elects the speaker of the house on the first day of every new congress.
Mr. Boehner is an irrelevant has-been. He’s done nothing to harm either America or democracy. This week, he gave me a good chuckle and nothing more.
Cruz was the architect of the government shutdown fiasco. Cruz went very far to filibuster Obamacare even though it meant nothing but gathering some Tea Party brownie points and freaking my mom out since she gets social security.
Boehner had to deal with that garbage and is reasonably upset. It made his job much harder for nothing.
I’m talking about the rules of etiquette. It’s just like Dr. Smith is still Dr. Smith even when he retires. He earned the title and he doesn’t lose it.
You’ll notice Hillary is typically addressed as Secretary Clinton. I just used her because she is in the public eye right now and not currently in office. It’s also correct to say she is former Secretary of State, but when speaking to her I believe she maintains the title. When speaking about her I think it can go either way, but I’m not sure. Writing former when talking about the person certainly clarifies if they are currently in the position or not.
Just imagine calling Reagan, Bush, Carter, Clinton just Mr. Lastname to their face? No. I think they continue to hold their title. That’s what I was taught anyway.
That’s exactly what I said, @JLeslie.
George W. Bush is Mr. President when addressed, but he is not President of the United States.
John Boehner is Mr. Speaker when addressed, but he is not ”...speaker of the house John Boehner”.
One is a title, the other an honorific.
I was wrong, I forgot that he is the former speaker of the house. (I don’t understand why you always address an ex president as Mr. President” in America How do you address the ex CEO of a company?—) But anyway referring to someone as lucifer? If it is coming from supporters of Trump I guess I can understand it. One can understand anything froma a Trump supporter.
@flo Given how evil Ted Cruz is, likening him to Lucifer is probably pretty accurate.
Boehner, being Catholic, renews his baptismal vows every Easter to “renounce Satan, and all his works.”
@ibstubro I actually am not sure if former presidents are still addressed as Mr. President? Are you sure about that? Using Pres. Bush vs Mr. President seems like two different things.
@JLeslie There must be some videos of interviews with ex presidents.
@johnpowell and @zenvelo and @stanleybmanly
1)Does John Boehner see filibustering in general as an evil thing?
2)If he were in Cruz’s position and Cruz was the speaker of the houses it possible that he wouldn’t have used it himself about something he felt strongly about? Boehner found Cruz the most challenging? Is that what evil means in this case?
Again I wouldn’t even use the term Lucifer for Trump and Trump is the horiidest of the horridests. Again it makes me think you’re Trump or Trump suupporters
@stanleybmanly your post sounds exactly what others have written and said about Trump
@flo I am not a Trump fan in any way shape or form. But he is not as inherentky eveil as Cruz. Trump is not too bright outside of promoting his business interests. Cruz is well educated and smart, but with an unctuous approach, and thinks he was divinely chosen. His thinking he was chosen by God is why he is Lucifer incarnate.
@zenvelo omg. 1) Are you trying to be funny? you didn’t address the 1st part of my post: 1) and 2).
2) Again, are you trying to be funny? “Trump is not too bright outside of promoting his business interests.”??? Not being too bright?? You can say that about some of the most wonderful people. You sound like one of the people who drank the cool-aide. Remove the name Trump from that ssentence and ask around what name goes in the blank. No one would guess it’s Trump you’re referring to wouldn’t you say? Considering the despicable things he said and did to and about…..the list is long, you might as well be a Trump supporter. Sheesh. I guess it’s better to be embarrased enough to not declare that one is a Trump supporter though.
Trump is on a scale of 1–10, one being the worst, he is in the minus terretory. There is no need to go to the religion related words, and no need to go to speculation (Cruz “thinking he was chosen by God”). So Cruz is narcissist? But Trump is the opposite of narcissist righ?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2016/03/30/donald-trump-narcissist-in-chief-not-commander-in-chief/#7723beb75595
@flo Yes, we agree the Trump is awful. But at least he is awful upfront and in your face.
Ted Cruz is evil, he claims religious righteousness while lying to you. He lies all the time, cloaked in “Christian” beliefs.
Why are you defending Ted Cruz?
@ibstubro I just googled the etiquette and different sites say different things about all of it. Oy.
@flo
I don’t know how I missed this before. But it’s obvious, to me at least, that you are unfamiliar with Cruz’s hidden agenda.
If you really want to know, just put his name into search along with the words THEOCRATIC DOMINIONISM and you will see what I’m talking about.
There are far too many links to list, but this is what his Father believes and has preached and taught for years. Obviously Ted subscribes to this also but isn’t that specific about because then people would
realize that a Dominionist agenda would be in direct opposition to The Constitution.
Some people might think it would be wonderful if the US were to be governed by God’s law but most thinking Christians don’t. Why? Because it would be someone’s interpretation of what they perceive as God’s law and likely neither you, nor I, nor countless others would measure up to that level of stringent. Would you like to see people put to death for adultery or homosexuality or disobedient or rebellious teens stoned to death??
That’s what life would be like if Dominuinists controlled America.
Trump neither knows about or cares enough about this type of stuff enough to have it on his agenda.
Cruz does and is smart enough to put strategic people in place (Attorney General, Supreme Court judges, etc.) to facilitate laws putting this into effect. It’s not a pretty picture.
@Buttonstc you have a plate of poison. Everything else that’s not poison is better that the poison. Trump is the poison.
@Buttonstc
1)He told you, My supporterts would vote for me even if I shot someone on 5th avenue .... Can it get any worse than that? He’s saying to you:
”You’re *deaf and blind and an idiot, and a tool* ..... if you support me over the others.* What else do you need??
2)—Even if you haven’t thrown a tomato at him yet, (maybe you’ll change you’re mind) he tells people to “beat the crap out of” you anyway. Even if you just vocalize, or use visuals your objection he wants you to be beaten up. He wishes you need to be taken out in a stretcher?
3)—I would do a hell of a lot more than waterboarding. So, would it not include beheading?
4)Re. your ”Cruz does and is smart enough to *put strategic people in place (Attorney General, Supreme Court judges, etc.) to facilitate laws putting this into effect. It’s not a pretty picture.”*
So, he just puts a supreme court judges in place, does he? They don’t need to get approved by the Senate Judiciary committee? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appointment_and_confirmation_to_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/alex-salmond-donald-trump-1.3522337
@flo Cruz is a different poison, wrapped in chocolate, while Trump is poison in plain sight. Cruz would have been much more dangerous.
@flo
I never said I’d ever vote for Trump for President. I’m certainly not a supporter. But he is definitely the lesser of two evils. The thought of Cruz in the White House is chilling.
I’m assuming you never bothered doing the search I suggested. It is disturbing.
But, I suppose if you’re OK with reinstating the OT laws of the Mosaic covenant (you know, the stoning and all) then there’s not a whole lot more I can say.
I’m not the least bit stumped. I thought it was pretty obvious that I would not vote for Cruz and I JUST STATED in my previous post (and it wasn’t edited in) that I wouldn’t “ever vote for Trump” just to remove any doubts about that.
So, effectively, that means neither of them even tho I didn’t say it in the same sentence or specifically use the word “neither”
I made my distaste for BOTH OF THEM quite clear (unless someone has a problem with simple reading comprehension) and there’s not much I can do about that.
But all this is a moot point because Ted is finished (for this election cycle at least.) It’s obvious you like him far better than Trump and you’re certainly entitled to your opinion. And if you choose to remain in th e dark about his hidden agenda, that’s your right also. Good luck with that position.
@Buttonstc
What were you saying about my response to your the president puts the supreme court judges in.* Nothing.
@Buttonstc Nobody says ”....the lesser of the two evils…..” unless they want you to choose “the lesser of the 2 evils.”
Re. your “I JUST STATED in my previous post (and it wasn’t edited in) that I wouldn’t “ever vote for Trump” just to remove any doubts about that.” Where?? Would you post the statement that you wouldn’t ever vote for Trump? You can’t it’s not there.
The only thing I see in your previous post about Trump is:
”Trump neither knows about or cares enough about this type of stuff enough to have it on his agenda.” In other words, That (being theocratic) is the only way a president can be harmful, therefore he’s harmless, so ahead and vote for him, “he’s definitely the lesser of the two evils”
I can’t believe I’m quoting my own self, but here is a direct copy/paste from my previous post.
————————————————————————-
I never said I’d ever vote for Trump for President. I’m certainly not a supporter.
———————————————————————
What part of that was unclear ?
Never mind. Dont bother replying. Thats a rhetorical question simply stating the obvious.
I’m done with this Q and will not be following further. It’s clear that you have Cruz on some sort of a pedestal and you’re determined that nothing will ever change your mind, so that’s fine by me. Since he’s finished for this election cycle anyhow, it’s a moot point.
@Buttonstc Again you haven’t responded to your the president putting in the Supreme Court Judges thing.
I was looking at your 1st post (not your previous post) since I was quoting you, so I was wrong about which post.
Regarding your “Ted is finished (for this election cycle at least.)” and “Since he’s finished for this election cycle anyhow, it’s a moot point.” Look at this search result:
https://www.google.ca/#q=cruz+suspends+his+campaign+
Suspend campaign and drop out of race, different things.
he said “So with a heavy heart but with boundless optimism for the long-term future of our nation, we are suspending our campaign”.
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
