Synopsis Of Boehner's Bizarre May 9 Press Q&A, With Actual Quotes

Synopsis Of Boehner's Bizarre May 9 Press Q&A, With Actual Quotes

MaxShimba

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Posts
36,008
Reaction score
4,093
130509-synopsis-of-boehners-bizarre-may-9-press-qa-with-actual-quotes.jpg

Boehner Goes Democrat, Admits 'We Can't Cut Our Way to Prosperity

Things are so bad for Speaker Boehner that he's touting Democratic talking points in his desperation to deal with his unruly Republican House caucus. Today, while speaking at a press conference, the Speaker said, "… dealing with the long-term structural spending problem we have frankly is at the core of it. But we also know we can't cut our way to prosperity."

-snip- (video)

Boehner tipped his hat at his real troubles when he once again admitted that he has no control over the Republican House members. Asked about holding the debt ceiling hostage yet again, the Speaker basically said he would try to talk to his members, but it's all going to depend on what they believe they need to do.

"We continue to spend more money than we bring in… " Yet, his House is against raising any revenue. "Our conversations have begun. We're going to have a big conversation with our members next week to talk about a way forward. What do our members believe is necessary in order to allow them to vote yes on increasing the debt limit?"

"… dealing with the long-term structural spending problem we have frankly is at the core of it. But we also know we can't cut our way to prosperity."

-snip-

Full article with video here: http://www.politicususa.com/boehner-mistakenly-admits-reporters-we-cut-prosperity.html
 
Stereotypes: (R) want to cut the budget to create prosperity; (D) want to tax the population to create prosperity. Or "(D) want to borrow our way to prosperity."

The stereotypes, as heart-warming and unthinking as they may be, focus on the means to reaching a solution and not the solution itself: economic expansion.

And both sides glory in the wonders of shouting from the roof tops, "post hoc ergo propter hoc" as we generalize from a small number of not strictly comparable events while decrying precisely the fallacy of the other side's using post-hoc thinking and generalizing from a small number of not strictly comparable events.
 
Back
Top Bottom