Jonathan Chait: John Boehner Too Embarrassed to Defend His Own Extortion Demands

[highplainsdem]

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/10/boehner-too-embarrassed-to-defend-extortion.html

Like President Obama, John Boehner used his remarks today to reiterate his same position on the debt ceiling and the government shutdown. Boehner’s central rhetorical thrust, as it has been all along, has been to elide the crucial distinction between hostage-taking and normal political negotiation. The latter involves mutual concessions in order to arrive at policy changes both parties agree would improve the status quo. The former involves one party forcing the other to accept otherwise unacceptable policy changes by threatening to undertake actions that both sides agree are harmful.

Boehner began by repeating his debunked and obvious falsehood that the debt ceiling is always used in the manner he proposes to use it now. Boehner’s line here is that “27 times” in the past it has forced the parties to deal with the deficit. In his earlier press conference, Obama explained why this is false: Those instances actually entailed the two parties negotiating in the traditional fashion and appending a debt-ceiling increase onto the final result. They did not involve a party actually threatening default to wrest un-reciprocated concessions.

-snip-



Even more audaciously, Boehner dismissed the notion of lifting the debt ceiling and then negotiating the budget as “unconditional surrender.” How it could be unconditional surrender when he publicly favors lifting the debt ceiling, Boehner did not say. Obama and Boehner disagree on a wide array of budget policies. They agree that the debt ceiling needs to be lifted. Doing the thing both parties agree upon is a bizarre definition of unconditional surrender. If Boehner was an actual debt-ceiling truther, who argued that lifting the debt ceiling somehow worsens the fiscal position of the U.S. government, then lifting the debt ceiling would be surrender. But he isn’t. He agrees with Obama on the merits of the debt ceiling. Unconditional surrender is when one party agrees to do something it opposes but the other party wants — say, delaying Obamacare, as Boehner is proposing.

The most telling thing about Boehner’s remarks is their brevity. The Speaker spoke for about five minutes, responded briefly to one question, and bolted out the door. Obama’s disquisition earlier today may have been long (over an hour) and professorial. But he was able to defend his position against questions, engage counterarguments, and marshal facts to support his position. Boehner couldn’t do any of those things. So he did the only thing a man in his position could do: repeat a handful of false or crazy talking points and quickly flee the premises.

[BumRushDaShow]

1. And naturally, the M$M spent many column inches

adding in filler that they felt should have been part of the REST of Boner's remarks that he managed to leave out in his content-less 10 minutes at the mic... all to "equalize" it with the President's 1+ hours laying out of his position.

[russspeakeasy]

2. "Both sides are equally to blame", Chuck Todd.

[gopiscrap]

4. Toad is a corporate whore, of course he is going to say that.

[gopiscrap]

3. What a sorry piece of shit for a speaker

[Cha]

5. thanks highplainsdem.. I've read tomorrow.. PBO

is going to..

Mark Knoller ✔ @markknoller

Also tomorrow at the WH: Pres Obama sits for interviews with four local TV news anchors to discuss the Govt shutdown & Debt Limit.1:40 PM - 8 Oct 2013

10 Retweets 1 favorite ReplyRetweet

[calimary]

6. Hope so! He needs to remain on offense. And fully use the bully pulpit he has as President.

Keep making his case. Over and over. The other side repeats ad nauseam - he has to, as well.

[blkmusclmachine]

7. Too drunk, probably.

[Uncle Joe]

8. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, highplainsdem.