Hey, let’s elect a new Speaker from outside the House

posted at 7:31 pm on December 26, 2012 by Allahpundit

Ed’s headline in the Greenroom for this piece (written by the co-author of “The Republicans Are the Problem”) tells you all you need to know about what an unserious bit of trolling it is, but I’m oddly comforted to see it show up on WaPo’s op-ed page. It’s proof positive that even the most celebrated newspapers aren’t immune from having to scrounge for content in the news desert between Christmas and New Year’s. Coming tomorrow, presumably: “Let’s repeal term limits for Obama.”

Still, it’s worth writing about for two reasons. One: Conservative dissatisfaction with Boehner is real. We may well end up with a new Speaker on January 3. No harm in thinking about alternatives. Two: It’s a useful prism through which to consider the leadership void in the GOP right now.

What if Boehner doesn’t survive? Go to Article I, Section 2: The Constitution does not say that the speaker of the House has to be a member of the House. In fact, the House can choose anybody a majority wants to fill the post. Every speaker has been a representative from the majority party. But these days, the old pattern clearly is not working…

The best way out of this mess would be to find someone from outside the House to transcend the differences and alter the dysfunctional dynamic we are all enduring. Ideally, that individual would transcend politics and party — but after David Petraeus’s stumble, we don’t have many such candidates. It would have to be a partisan Republican.

One option would be Jon Huntsman. By any reasonable standard, he is a conservative Republican: As governor of Utah, he supported smaller government, lower taxes and balanced budgets, and he opted consistently for market-based solutions. As a presidential candidate, he supported positions that were in the wheelhouse of Ronald Reagan. But a Speaker Huntsman would look beyond party and provide a different kind of leadership. He would drive a hard bargain with the president but would aim for a broad majority from the center out, not from the right fringe in. He could not force legislation onto the floor, but he would have immense moral suasion.

Another option would be Mitch Daniels, the longtime governor of Indiana and a favorite on the right. Daniels has shown a remarkable ability to work with Democrats and Republicans, and he is a genuine fiscal conservative — meaning he does not worship at the shrine of tax cuts if they deepen deficits, and he would look for the kind of balanced approach to the fiscal problem put forward by Simpson-Bowles, ­Rivlin-Domenici and the Gang of Six.

It’s true, Huntsman or Daniels might pursue some sort of Bowles-Simpson deal with Obama. So what? Even if one of them hammered out a mutually acceptable deal with Obama, how would he get it passed? The difficulty in the House isn’t that Boehner’s opposed to a grand bargain or a “balanced approach,” it’s the fact that (a) the Democratic caucus is overwhelmingly liberal and (b) the tea party minority on the GOP side is sizable enough that it can block nearly any bill that relies on Republican votes alone to get to 218. And thanks to the magic of gerrymandering, congressmen from deep red or deep blue districts — of which there are many — have more to fear from a primary challenge by someone to their right or left, respectively, than they do from the general election. (Some Republicans were candid about this in explaining why they voted against Plan B.) Jon Huntsman’s alleged “immense moral suasion” isn’t going to convince a liberal or conservative whose ass is on the line in two years to back a compromise bill that neither side likes.

Is there anyone with enough “moral suasion” to convince a divided caucus to pass a compromise with the president, though? If Democrats had this problem, the obvious answer (as it always is) would be Bill Clinton. He remains hugely popular in his party and among the population generally, and he has the gravitas of being an ex-president. There’s no one like that on the Republican side, someone so respected by all wings of the party that their endorsement of a “grand bargain” package would provide enough political cover to conservatives to vote for it that they wouldn’t have to worry (much) about a primary. Daniels does have lots of cred nationally on fiscal issues but not remotely enough stature for a recalcitrant conservative congressman to cast a tough vote without fear of consequences. The only person I can think of who might fit the bill is Paul Ryan: He’s showed unusual seriousness on the federal budget with the Path to Prosperity, he has a national profile now thanks to Romney, and he knows members of the GOP caucus personally, which is key to persuasion. The problem is, as someone with presidential ambitions, Ryan would be nuts to step into this role. He’ll face the same primary problem on a national scale in 2016 as individual Republican congressmen will face two years from now. And he’s refused to compromise on a grand bargain when he’s had opportunities in the past. Remember, he voted no on Bowles-Simpson because it didn’t go far enough to reduce health-care costs. Why would he want the most thankless job in Washington, then? Best-case scenario is that he helps pass a grand bargain that conservatives dislike. Worst-case scenario is that the gridlock continues and he’s derided by the media as an ineffective leader. (He endorsed Boehner’s Plan B and yet they couldn’t even get the bill to the floor.) Who needs that?

You know, now that I think of it, there is a guy out there with the stature and moral suasion to deliver 100+ votes from his own party for a significant compromise on deficit reduction if he was really, really interested in one. Is he?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

If you listen closely, the MSM and the WH are making it clear that the Tea Party has no place in DC.

Key West Reader on December 26, 2012 at 8:36 PM

That’s fine with me. I want a national divorce. I don’t want to be associated or connected or bound to these leftist slugs who hate America in any way whatsoever. They can have their American Socialist Superstate. They deserve it. I don’t.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 26, 2012 at 8:44 PM

That’s what most of this is about, dividing the GOP and turning it against the Tea Party. The only suitable response is another 2010 in 2014.

petefrt on December 26, 2012 at 8:44 PM

This!

Happy Nomad on December 26, 2012 at 8:45 PM

Newt’s problem as a public face for the party is that he’s a fat, old, ugly white man named Newt. The media makes enough of a caricature of the GOP already without us tossing them that kind of softball.

alchemist19 on December 26, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Agree with all of the above except you missed a key component. N

Newt’s problem as a public face for the party is that he’s a fat, old, ugly white man named Newt from the South.

Happy Nomad on December 26, 2012 at 8:49 PM

Why not? Look at the clown that Minnesota ended up with in the Senate after the Dems stole the election.

Happy Nomad on December 26, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Nugent could have some real fun with that rassler guy.
Are compound bows allowed in DC?

eyesky on December 26, 2012 at 8:49 PM

No Palin please. No Peace.
Or, Allen West please.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 26, 2012 at 7:53 PM

FIFY

:-)

Fallon on December 26, 2012 at 8:51 PM

Speaker AllahPundit
( why not ??)

burrata on December 26, 2012 at 8:51 PM

Are compound bows allowed in DC?

eyesky on December 26, 2012 at 8:49 PM

High capacity bows are banned in DC. And high powered arrows.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 26, 2012 at 8:51 PM

Had another thought…Liz Cheney

derft on December 26, 2012 at 8:51 PM

i nominate romney.

reliapundit on December 26, 2012 at 8:52 PM

…Sarah Palin…Newt…Mark Levin…Michelle crazy eyes…Mark Steyn… Jim The Mint…or Adam West…Rush…Resist We Much
…W H E N …?

KOOLAID2 on December 26, 2012 at 8:53 PM

Palin.

This will cause Twerp to buy a Danish

SparkPlug on December 26, 2012 at 8:54 PM

While we’re making heads explode:

John Ashcroft.
John Sununu, the elder.

massrighty on December 26, 2012 at 8:55 PM

And if I hadn’t been watching porn in another window it’da been first.

Lanceman on December 26, 2012 at 8:11 PM

you are amazing. That doesn’t work for me, can’t concentrate. I do have HA, cooking and RC helicopters tabs opened all at once sometimes.

arnold ziffel on December 26, 2012 at 8:57 PM

B9 said boehner was a crying rino. Funny.

We tried to warn the fake cons that the rinos would destroy the party. Arlen spectre, Christie, Crist are full on rhinos.

You can’t out rino a Donk and win.

SparkPlug on December 26, 2012 at 8:59 PM

I think it’s time for a Hot Gas Poll.

Who should replace Boehner as Speaker?

✓ SARAH PALIN

Pork-Chop on December 26, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Newt’s problem as a public face for the party is that he’s a fat, old, ugly white man named Newt. The media makes enough of a caricature of the GOP already without us tossing them that kind of softball.

alchemist19 on December 26, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Fair enough but I sure don’t understand how Urkel’s evil dork brother has come to symbolize cool.

arnold ziffel on December 26, 2012 at 9:00 PM

SparkPlug on December 26, 2012 at 8:54 PM

Nope. Danish was that other chick. *grin*
*And at you too, Fallon.grin*

annoyinglittletwerp on December 26, 2012 at 9:01 PM

Had another thought…Liz Cheney

derft on December 26, 2012 at 8:51 PM

Good choice as far as principle but like Jeb Bush too close to the previous administration to be effective. The left would have a field day with anybody named Bush or Cheney in a leadership position.

Happy Nomad on December 26, 2012 at 9:02 PM

Allen West!

Or Rush Limbaugh, just because of that liberal shtick from a few years back about Rush being the “leader” of the Republican Party. Then after a week, he can abdicate to Allen West.

Glenn Jericho on December 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM

I sure don’t understand how Urkel’s evil dork brother has come to symbolize cool.

arnold ziffel on December 26, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Urkel didn’t consult with America-hating terrorists on how to rally stupid greedy people. The rat-eared wonder did.

Happy Nomad on December 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Palin.

This will cause bluegill to spaz out.

SparkPlug on December 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Fair enough but I sure don’t understand how Urkel’s evil dork brother has come to symbolize cool.

arnold ziffel on December 26, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Because he has the media on his side to keep telling everyone how cool he is.

alchemist19 on December 26, 2012 at 9:05 PM

High capacity bows are banned in DC. And high powered arrows.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on December 26, 2012 at 8:51 PM

But what of high-capacity pea shooters?

Happy Nomad on December 26, 2012 at 9:06 PM

Who on earth would want the job??..:)

Dire Straits on December 26, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Palin.

This will cause bluegill to spaz out.

SparkPlug on December 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM

like a floppy drying out fish on the dock.

arnold ziffel on December 26, 2012 at 9:09 PM

Who on earth would want the job??..:)

Dire Straits on December 26, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Dr. Who? Did anyone see the Christmas episode? I seriously think people only watch Dr. Who because of the silly special effects and British accents.

Fallon on December 26, 2012 at 9:12 PM

Who on earth would want the job??..:)

Dire Straits on December 26, 2012 at 9:07 PM

I’m game. Don’t know how good a manager I would be but there would definitely be some heavy artillery directed at targets of opportunity. First on the agenda would be testosteroni supplements for the squishes.

arnold ziffel on December 26, 2012 at 9:14 PM

arnold ziffel on December 26, 2012 at 9:14 PM

LoLz..I hear you..:)

Dire Straits on December 26, 2012 at 9:19 PM

Fallon on December 26, 2012 at 9:12 PM

lolz..:)

Dire Straits on December 26, 2012 at 9:19 PM

Well it’s sort of an in joke, London has been destroyed on three different occasions on Christmas eve, so they moved it back to Victorian times,

narciso on December 26, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Ornstein, wants someone who will knuckledown to Obama, hence Huntsman and Daniels, we want someone who will hold the line,

narciso on December 26, 2012 at 9:27 PM

*peers over glasses*

annoyinglittletwerp on December 26, 2012 at 8:14 PM

You don’t wear glasses!

Lanceman on December 26, 2012 at 9:34 PM

Palin.

This will cause bluegill to spaz out.

SparkPlug on December 26, 2012 at 9:04 PM

You think I give two shits what that punk likes? After that sack of crap foisted Romney on us?

Lanceman on December 26, 2012 at 9:35 PM

You don’t wear glasses!

Lanceman on December 26, 2012 at 9:34 PM

I think she does.

Fallon on December 26, 2012 at 9:37 PM

Man the inside the beltway people really love pushing Huntsman. WTH…

I think it’s time for a Hot Gas Poll.

Who should replace Boehner as Speaker?

✓ SARAH PALIN

Pork-Chop on December 26, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Oooh, fancy check symbol. I like it. Palin would be awesome. All the establishment d-bags and punditocracy would have daily nervous breakdowns. I’m all for it.

Dongemaharu on December 26, 2012 at 9:38 PM

As long as we’re throwing names out

Ted Nugent

My guns and I would feel safe with Speaker Ted on the job.

eyesky on December 26, 2012 at 8:33 PM

I think my top three choices would be Ted Nugent, Sarah Palin and Hank Williams Jr. None of these three would fold like a cheap tent.

Sir Rants-A-Lot on December 26, 2012 at 9:38 PM

Specifically, Palin, Nugent and Hank Jr. in that order of preference.

Sir Rants-A-Lot on December 26, 2012 at 9:40 PM

Mell Brooks as “The Gov” in Blazing Saddles:

We have to protect our phoney Baloney Jobs here, gentlemen!

Tim_CA on December 26, 2012 at 9:40 PM

Mel

Tim_CA on December 26, 2012 at 9:41 PM

You don’t wear glasses!

Lanceman on December 26, 2012 at 9:34 PM

I think she does.

Fallon on December 26, 2012 at 9:37 PM

ROTFLMBO!!!
*Lanceyboy…go on my FB page and click on photos…and look @ what’s framing my adorable litle face in the Chick-Fil-A photo. Hmmm.*
The next pair are likely to be bifocals.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 26, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Who on earth would want the job??..:)

Dire Straits on December 26, 2012 at 9:07 PM

Raising my hand! I honestly think that the House GOP’s problem is the fact that they are being led by a career politician and not somebody with conservative integrity, principle or honor.

It’s easy to get re-elected. Tougher to lead. Boehner went for easy over tough.

Happy Nomad on December 26, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Has to be Sarah Palin. She has the intestinal fortitude, backbone, and cajones to get the job done.

Mirimichi on December 26, 2012 at 9:42 PM

but after David Petraeus’s stumble, we don’t have many such candidates. It would have to be a partisan Republican.

One option would be Jon Huntsman….

I thought at first this was some kind of spoof article that was meant as a joke…

David Patraeus was a good option before his stumble? Seriously?

Huntsman? LOL!

William Eaton on December 26, 2012 at 9:43 PM

Palin as Speaker of the House… Then, start impeachment hearings. Pinch me, I’m dreaming.

Fallon on December 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM

To answer eeyore / allahpundit’s premise – apparently what has gone wrong is that the moderate/RINO punderati has no f’n clue about the Constitution or anything beyond the most superficial or distorted understandings of it’s provisions.

The Speaker is not required to be an elected member of the House.

Given that the RINO leadership of the GOP-E is hopelessly nutless and unprincipled, it would behoove the House Majority (and this nation) to pick someone with a spine and some gonads.

rayra on December 26, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Has to be Sarah Palin. She has the intestinal fortitude, backbone, and cajones to get the job done.

Mirimichi on December 26, 2012 at 9:42 PM

As long as nobody starts a chain of lawsuits against her… :P

I’d rather go with Bachmann or Amash.

TMOverbeck on December 26, 2012 at 10:03 PM

JENNA JAMESON! !!!

The press conferences would be epic.

dforston on December 26, 2012 at 10:03 PM

CUDA!

BoxHead1 on December 26, 2012 at 10:27 PM

If the Speaker comes from outside the elected members of the House, does that add one vote to the vote total?

News2Use on December 26, 2012 at 10:31 PM

** PALIN **

Palin as Speaker of the House… Then, start impeachment hearings. Pinch me, I’m dreaming.

Fallon on December 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM

I like dreamin’….

theotherone on December 26, 2012 at 10:33 PM

Hey, let’s elect a new Speaker from outside the House

BISHOP…

Gohawgs on December 26, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Scott Walker. Enough said.

nobar on December 26, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Palin as Speaker of the House… Then, start impeachment hearings. Pinch me, I’m dreaming.

Fallon on December 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM

Because impeachment didn’t blow up in our faces last time…

alchemist19 on December 26, 2012 at 10:44 PM

idesign on December 26, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Still an idiot I see.
You seem to think that any and every woman who takes issue with Sarah Palin only does so out of envy.
You’d probably sound smarter if you stopped ‘thinking’.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 26, 2012 at 8:00 PM

I find it quite amusing that you are criticizing IDesign and
others as to their “thinking” capabilities. If anyone posts
“Palin’s” name on any HA post you come out of the woodwork
shouting “no, no, mommy please, no, no Palin!”.

You are so predictable. You want IDesign and others to stop
“thinking” when it is apparent that you haven’t even started.

Amjean on December 26, 2012 at 11:07 PM

=====================================================

Speaking of replacing with someone working across the aisle:

What about replacing Dingy Corruption Harry?

The Senate is a big mess to be cleaned up. Starting with someone who will create a budget instead of Dingy’s Auto Pilot Off The Cliff Budget

huntingmoose on December 26, 2012 at 11:14 PM

Amish endorsed RON PAUL for president–no thank you.

Bullhead on December 26, 2012 at 11:23 PM

to transcend the differences and alter the dysfunctional dynamic we are all enduring.

Those words sound smart and mean nothing. They are supposed to take the place of thought.

Buddahpundit on December 26, 2012 at 11:27 PM

Has to be Sarah Palin. She has the intestinal fortitude, backbone, and cajones to get the job done.

Mirimichi

And yet, she was too afraid to run for president when the country needed her most. What did she do, recently find these things on her tour bus?

Because impeachment didn’t blow up in our faces last time…

alchemist19

It didn’t, despite that being the accepted non-factual version of history.

xblade on December 26, 2012 at 11:27 PM

Because impeachment didn’t blow up in our faces last time…

alchemist19 on December 26, 2012 at 10:44 PM

It was definitely the Republican highlight of the last 30 years. It ended the Democrats hold on power. People saw the Republicans standing for something and put them in control a few months later.

Buddahpundit on December 26, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Oh yeah, the day the GOP pushes Huntsman on me as Speaker is the day I wave adios to the Republican party. I am halfway out the door as it is.

sybilll on December 26, 2012 at 11:44 PM

It didn’t, despite that being the accepted non-factual version of history.

xblade on December 26, 2012 at 11:27 PM

We became the first opposition party to lose seats in the House in a president’s sixth year midterm pretty much ever. Republicans gained a couple seats thanks to an increase in the size of the House, though they gained less and 1/3 of the seats the Democrats did. Even if you combine presidential terms from the same party like JFK/LBJ, Harding/Coolidge, etc. you’ve got to go back I believe to Andrew Jackson just to find the incumbent’s party breaking even. So yes, impeachment was a disaster.

alchemist19 on December 26, 2012 at 11:58 PM

Ah, stupid copy/paste error!

If you combine the McKinley/Teddy Roosevelt terms you can point to 1902 as a year the president’s party gained House seats in their sixth year holding the White House but that increase was due to an overall increase in the size of the House. Democrat gains were more substantial. To my knowledge you’ve got to go all the way back to James Monroe when the Federalist Party was dying it’s final death to find a president’s party gaining seats in that president’s sixth year until Clinton did it, or rather we did it to ourselves.

alchemist19 on December 27, 2012 at 12:03 AM

File this next to – the need to be appealing to, and attracting more Minority voters- blacks and Latino’s specifically..

Because………

We’re (always) the problem, right?

We must change, right?

FlaMurph on December 27, 2012 at 12:21 AM

JENNA JAMESON! !!!

The press conferences would be epic.

dforston on December 26, 2012 at 10:03 PM

** PALIN **

Palin as Speaker of the House… Then, start impeachment hearings. Pinch me, I’m dreaming.

Fallon on December 26, 2012 at 9:44 PM

I like dreamin’….

theotherone on December 26, 2012 at 10:33 PM

Jenna and Palin as co-Speakers!!!! Sorry, been away from the wife too long.

Nutstuyu on December 27, 2012 at 12:26 AM

How about someone who actually understands the damn Constitution?

While we’re dreaming, I’d add Justice Scalia and Judge Anthony Napolitano to the Mark Levin suggestion

Allen West is the only real answer. It will make liberal heads explode, like the Tim Scott Senate pick x 1000

thurman on December 27, 2012 at 12:34 AM

If Sarah Palin gave one of her balls to John Boehner, he’d still be one short.

pdigaudio on December 27, 2012 at 12:52 AM

Ironically, that was due to gerrymandering by the liberals, that explained the loss of seats.

narciso on December 27, 2012 at 12:53 AM

If Sarah Palin gave one of her balls to John Boehner, he’d still be one short.

pdigaudio on December 27, 2012 at 12:52 AM

She has balls to spare yet she didn’t have it in her to step up when she saw America in peril teetering on the edge and no good conservatives stepping up to run against Barack Obama last year?

alchemist19 on December 27, 2012 at 1:06 AM

but after David Petraeus’s stumble, we don’t have many such candidates. It would have to be a partisan Republican.

One option would be Jon Huntsman….

I thought at first this was some kind of spoof article that was meant as a joke…

David Patraeus was a good option before his stumble? Seriously?

Huntsman? LOL!

William Eaton on December 26, 2012 at 9:43 PM</

Bill Clinton?!

What on Earth is it that people still see in this guy? A world class sleazebag who is about as difficult to dislodge as a roach infestation.

PatriotGal2257 on December 27, 2012 at 1:16 AM

Man the inside the beltway people really love pushing Huntsman. WTH…

I think it’s time for a Hot Gas Poll.

Who should replace Boehner as Speaker?

✓ SARAH PALIN

Pork-Chop on December 26, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Oooh, fancy check symbol. I like it. Palin would be awesome. All the establishment d-bags and punditocracy would have daily nervous breakdowns. I’m all for it.

Dongemaharu on December 26, 2012 at 9:38 PM

Both names bandied in above are RINOs, why are you asking why GOP would push for either? Same idiots, different day.

Allen West would be great! Palin as well. Newt, despite all you guys are posting above, would be GREAT as well. We keep forgetting that Boehner was one of the ten idiots who pushed Newt out, now we’re asking how we ended up with the idiot as Speaker? Really don’t care what Newt does in private life, we had good economy and WH in check under his leadership and it is only after he was chased out that GOP disintegrated into RINO land.

riddick on December 27, 2012 at 1:25 AM

Ed’s headline in the Greenroom for this piece (written by the co-author of “The Republicans Are the Problem”) tells you all you need to know about what an unserious bit of trolling it is, but…..

Let’s see - BUTT YOU’D Like to help Solicit, Enable and Promulgate THAT kind of Trolling yourself, eh, AP? IN FACT – THIS IS THE TROLLING-PIECE OF B.S. THAT YOU WISH YOU HAD WRITTEN YOURSELF!!

…because WHAT BETTER WAY to ENSURE the CONSTANT sowing of DISSENSION in the Conservative Movement?!!

williamg on December 27, 2012 at 2:04 AM

No Palin please.
Allen West please.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 26, 2012 at 7:53 PM

.
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
.

Mark Steyn!

annoyinglittletwerp on December 26, 2012 at 7:55 PM

.
Mark Steyn, I could support (if he’s a citizen).

listens2glenn on December 27, 2012 at 2:22 AM

If Sarah Palin gave one of her balls to John Boehner, he’d still be one short.

pdigaudio on December 27, 2012 at 12:52 AM

.
. . . . : )
.
.
Good night, everybody !

listens2glenn on December 27, 2012 at 2:25 AM

I’d rather go with Bachmann or Amash.

TMOverbeck on December 26, 2012 at 10:03 PM

.
I definitely could support Bachmann.

listens2glenn on December 27, 2012 at 2:29 AM

pdigaudio on December 27, 2012 at 12:52 AM

.
She has balls to spare yet she didn’t have it in her to step up when she saw America in peril teetering on the edge and no good conservatives stepping up to run against Barack Obama last year?

alchemist19 on December 27, 2012 at 1:06 AM

.
Why do you esteem her decision as being a “lack of character strength”?

listens2glenn on December 27, 2012 at 2:32 AM

As a presidential candidate, he supported positions that were in the wheelhouse of Ronald Reagan.

I love the way this has become a code phrase for, “He’s a liberal compared to present-day Republicans, but present-day Republicans are way too conservative, so think of him as a normal conservative as opposed to a wacko conservative.” Comparing what a President does with a solid but centrist Democratic Congress in a time with completely different challenges, to what a candidate says today, is an apples-and-oranges comparison that shouldn’t be taken seriously.

calbear on December 27, 2012 at 3:32 AM

She has balls to spare yet she didn’t have it in her to step up when she saw America in peril teetering on the edge and no good conservatives stepping up to run against Barack Obama last year?

alchemist19 on December 27, 2012 at 1:06 AM

Oh come on the entire GOP establishment ganged up on her when they panicked after she made fools of the left with her bus tour and the great Alaska e-mail posses failed. Acid Ann Coulter, Christie, Krauthammer, Wills,Ingraham, Noonan, and even Dick Cheney (Twice) received his emergency call to take a shot (metaphorically) at her.
She proved her leadership sensibility, by not rushing headlong into the elite’s little lynching fame. Like Douglas MacArthur, she had sense enough to retreat against overwhelming enemy (both parties feared her)but he won—unconditional surrender over a fight-to-the -death Japan.

Don L on December 27, 2012 at 4:10 AM

Oh come on the entire GOP establishment ganged up on her when they panicked after she made fools of the left with her bus tour and the great Alaska e-mail posses failed. Acid Ann Coulter, Christie, Krauthammer, Wills,Ingraham, Noonan, and even Dick Cheney (Twice) received his emergency call to take a shot (metaphorically) at her.
She proved her leadership sensibility, by not rushing headlong into the elite’s little lynching fame. Like Douglas MacArthur, she had sense enough to retreat against overwhelming enemy (both parties feared her)but he won—unconditional surrender over a fight-to-the -death Japan.

Don L on December 27, 2012 at 4:10 AM

Please. The GOP Establishment, if such a thing even exists, is a tired and toothless thing. This Establishment wasn’t even good enough to beat Barack Obama in this economy, what makes you think they could have beaten a conservative firebrand with a massive national organization and an army of grassroots supporters? It was so bad for the base that they were latching onto idiots just to have something that looked conservative to support! You think they wouldn’t have gone for Palin? What could the establishment have done to her that would have made her supporters not love her?

Or was this the time she picked to not stand up to the good ol’ boys club with their politics as usual because she didn’t think she had it in her? I’m having visions of her pulling a Patsy Schroeder, sobbing “I didn’t think I could win!” and burying her head in Todd’s shoulder.

alchemist19 on December 27, 2012 at 5:12 AM

Dear Mister Fantasy play us a tune
Something to make us all happy
Do anything take us out of this gloom
Sing a song, play guitar
Make it snappy
You are the one who can make us all laugh
But doing that you break out in tears
Please don’t be sad if it was a straight mind you had
We wouldn’t have known you all these years

It takes many terms in the House to build the kind of coalitions and experience in the committee system needed to be Speaker. The idea that someone is going to suddenly pop up as a new movement conservative alternative, or that the GOP Caucus is going to pick someone outside the current leadership (much less outside the House) is a sign to call your designated driver.

Adjoran on December 27, 2012 at 5:24 AM

John Huntsman- LAUGHABLE really just LAUGHABLE

Why not just change the name of Congress to Politiboro and get it over with then

Philo Beddoe on December 27, 2012 at 6:38 AM

Speaker AllahPundit
( why not ??)

burrata on December 26, 2012 at 8:51 PM

If you want a RINO; stick with Boehner!

patch on December 27, 2012 at 7:19 AM

I’ve read the comments about Newt and that is why the Republicans will lose it all. The Democrats throw out Harry Reid and Pelosi and they do just fine. Newt is smarter than both of them, knows where the bodies are buried, and will come up with 100 ideas to solve the problem, 90 of which will work. Reid and Pelosi will come up with 100 ideas to solve the problem, each of them guaranteed to screw the country and our illustrious free press will declare every one of them a winner.

If we need someone from the outside and you’re worried about a face, let Sarah Palin be the face and Newt be the brain and have a co-speakership. (And no, I’m not insinuating Palin doesn’t have a brain, I have a tremendous amount of respect for Sarah Palin).

bflat879 on December 27, 2012 at 7:23 AM

I’ve read the comments about Newt and that is why the Republicans will lose it all. The Democrats throw out Harry Reid and Pelosi and they do just fine. Newt is smarter than both of them, knows where the bodies are buried, and will come up with 100 ideas to solve the problem, 90 of which will work. Reid and Pelosi will come up with 100 ideas to solve the problem, each of them guaranteed to screw the country and our illustrious free press will declare every one of them a winner.

If we need someone from the outside and you’re worried about a face, let Sarah Palin be the face and Newt be the brain and have a co-speakership. (And no, I’m not insinuating Palin doesn’t have a brain, I have a tremendous amount of respect for Sarah Palin).

bflat879 on December 27, 2012 at 7:23 AM

I’m not so hot on bringing someone in from the outside but you’ve got good points.

Newt has his faults, but he accomplished a lot of good things. Newt got criticized for things he said more than what he ever did, other than sitting on that stupid couch. But the things he actually accomplished were all good things. But people crucify him for things he says.
But RINO’s and even Boehner.. who hate Newt.. desperately want to work with Obama, Harry Ried and Nancy Pelosi. For some of them.. it would be like their highest honor to be seen making a deal with Obama while at the same time crucifying Newt.

JellyToast on December 27, 2012 at 7:35 AM

Hating Boehner only hurts the efforts to change the course of our country. Besides the fact that strategically it’s just stupid, it makes us look intolerant and the undecided voters won’t consider us. Thus, we lose elections like the Senate contest in 2012. Let’s stop this nonsense now!

thuja on December 27, 2012 at 8:38 AM

Huntsman, the Zero boot licker, seriously? I nominate Rush.

Kissmygrits on December 27, 2012 at 8:41 AM

Obama isn’t interested in “compromise”. He never has been.

Murf76 on December 27, 2012 at 8:46 AM

One option would be Jon Huntsman. By any reasonable standard, he is a conservative Republican:

LOL. I suppose he is, from the far-left wack-job O-bot perspective.

ddrintn on December 27, 2012 at 8:57 AM

It’s not even worth discussing. It is pretty clear that Obama and the democrats have no interest in compromise – so why argue about who best could negotiate a compromise?

When are we on the right going to wake up and realize that the left has no interest in compromise. They believe they have won decisively and will always be in power. Let the fiscal cliff happen, let them implode. Sure – the GOP will likely be blamed for it (wrongly) because the press doesn’t report any facts and instead shills for liberals, but when the democrats control the WH and both houses of congress for 2 years and all they do is raise everyone’s taxes, increase the deficit and the debt, and leave the nation with high unemployment, stifling over-regulation, and a deadly tax burden, the right will rise again.

By losing the 2012 presidential election we have lost the major issue of the day – which is trying to repeal obamacare. We can’t do that, nothing else matters at this point. We are not going to get entitlement reform, real spending cuts, or any kind of fiscal sanity out of the Gov’t as long as dems hold the senate and/or WH. So, we may as well let them own everything.

I don’t want a “grand bargain” b/c a “grand bargain” will be more of the same B.S. we always get – alleged spending cuts to take place in 10 years and tax increases starting now. Why bother? 1) the dems aren’t going to compromise and 2) it isn’t worth it.

The GOP should simply shut down congress for 2 years then let the dems win the house back in 2014 (which is going to happen regardless. the press has now realized it can get away with being 100% partisan all of the time with no consequences, so it is going all out and the mushy middle buys the steady drumbeat that everything is the GOP’s fault), then see what people think in 2016. Hopefully, after the dems own both houses of congress and the WH and still make everything worse, the mushy middle will wake up and realize they are being lied to – that they can’t have everything for free like the press/dems tell them.

That is our best option right now.

Monkeytoe on December 27, 2012 at 9:04 AM

ddrintn on December 27, 2012 at 8:57 AM

He actually was pretty conservative but made two tactical errors destroying any credibility on that front:

1- accepting the ambassadorship from Obama; and

2- deciding to run in the GOP primary as a centrist.

Monkeytoe on December 27, 2012 at 9:06 AM

If it weren’t for his age I’d suggest Thomas Sowell.

Among the younger possibilities, How about The Instapundit, Glenn Reynolds? Well established with a considerable public, a lawyer, a moderate libertarian (which ought to make him reasonably acceptable to all sides, but won’t), thoroughly versed in government and his wife is killer!

But he’s probably got too much sense to take the job.

PersonFromPorlock on December 27, 2012 at 9:07 AM

Go to Article I, Section 2: The Constitution does not say that the speaker of the House has to be a member of the House.

Only an idiot or a progressive would believe this. But, I repeat myself. When you elect “officers” for an organization, they – by definition – have to be members of the organization. This used to be something that anyone with more than two brain cells to rub together understood. But, with idiotic court cases specifying things like a Christian campus organization can’t require its leaders to be believing, practicing Christians, I guess anything is a go, now!

By this moron’s reasoning, I say we should elect George Patton as President! After all, there’s no requirement that the candidate be alive, merely that he be over a certain age!

GWB on December 27, 2012 at 9:32 AM

The author wrote: “The only person I can think of who might fit the bill is Paul Ryan: He’s showed unusual seriousness on the federal budget with the Path to Prosperit…”

——————-

ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?

Paul Ryan’s super-duper, totally fantastic, RINO approved plan (sarc!) CUTS THE DEFICIT SPENDING BY HALF by the year 2029! Isn’t that great!!!!!!! Reduces deficit spending By HALF! That’s your “unusually serious” plan? You ARE joking, aren’t you?

Paul Ryan is cut from the same cloth as Boehner and Cantor. He just wants the MSM to like him. If he wasn’t a RINO then the RINO Establishment currently running the Republican Party (straight into oblivion) would not have approved him as the VP pick.

Ryan voted for the failed Stimulus Plans, voted for bailing out the Banks and Wall Street, AND voted with Boehner into getting suckered by Obama into raising the debt ceiling by $2.7 Trillion in exchange for a Super-Duper Deficit Reduction Committee which EVERYBODY (except Boehner, Cantor and Ryan!) knew was doomed to fail. In fact, IT WAS SETUP TO FAIL! He ALSO approved the Sequestration which is going to cut $500 Billion from the Military starting next month, which now Republicans are desperately trying to distance themselves from.

OH PLEASE! Paul Ryan is RINO-approved. Another go-along-to-get-along sucker who (like Boehner & Cantor) leaves his spine at the door everytime he enters the halls of Congress.

Mahdi on December 27, 2012 at 9:57 AM

And this is why we need term limits in Congress. They’re more concerned about keeping their cush positions every other year than actually fixing the leaks in our country (and the basement’s already flooded).

Where are we at with a state-forced Constitutional Convention? If this doesn’t happen, we’re still on the it’s-going-to-get-much-worse-before-it-gets-better track.

TMOverbeck on December 27, 2012 at 10:17 AM

It is NOT a ‘Boehner’ Problem – It is a GOP Establishment Vs True Conservatives Vs Obama/Liberals problem:

1. Boehner is a ‘GOP Establishment’ guy, one who believes in compromising one’s ethics / morals / beliefs when necessary for the greater good, understanding that you can’t get EVERYTHING you want, can’t possible hope to get all of the GOP within the House to agree, & can’t then get any compromise from the agenda-driven Liberals.

2. The newly elected ‘Tea Party’ GOP members are TRUE CONSERVATIVES who are sticking to their campaign promises & their beliefs in SMALLER Govt, LESS INTRUSSIVE Govt, REDUCED SPENDING, & less taxation, who also KNOWS that any compromise will be 1-sided at best (if allowed to go the way ObamaLiberals want). they also know & fully comprehend that all Obama is proposing is BS, that it will NOT work, that it is ‘smoke & mirrors’, that the President has no real intention of doing what is best for the country, & is just fulfilling the teachings of his mentors Frank Marshall Davis, Saul Allinsky, Clowder & Pelvin, & Jeremiah Wright – that he is completing what his ‘anti-colonialist’ father wanted.

3. Liberals, like Obama, are more methodical, patient, & manipulative than the followrs of Islam. They learned in the 70s that they could not get what they wanted through protests & violence, so they began a campaign fof ‘infiltrating’ the schools & government. Obama & his ilk are pushing a nation-destroying agenda & – as proven time and again in the past – refuse to compromise, choosing instead to use a complicit media to paint anyone who stands in their way as the bad guy. As the Tea Party GOP understand – as OBAMA understands, their agenda is aout powr & destroying anything in their way to get it. Obama’s economic plan, for example is a JOKE: $1.6 Trillion in new tax revenue over 10 years while ADDING $1.7 Trillion in MORE DEBT EVERY YEAR, resulting in approx $15.4 Trillion in new debt at the end of that 10 years (which means our Natl Debt being about $32 TRILLION after 10 years)! It will probably be a LOT more if Obama gets his way – why else would e be DEMANDING as part of the ‘fiscal cliff’ deal a 2 year end to the Debt Limit, allowing him to spend as much as he wants over 2 Years without having to go to Conress for approval (which is against what is in the Constitution, by the way)?!

Boehner is faced with all of this…and HE WILL ‘CAVE’…a majority of our politicians, who are more worried about personal/partisan politics & getting re-elected while appeasing the special interest groups funding them, will ‘cave’ and do what is best for themselves / party, throwing us all under the proverbial bus…which is why the Founding fathers intended government service to be more like JURY DUTY (1 term then out of goverment service to avoid corruption) rather than as a CAREER!

easyt65 on December 27, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Leave it to the lefty Washington Post to tell us Republicans who to elect as Speaker of the House. Yeah, right!!! Besides, Jon Huntsman would be a horrible Speaker–as former Governor of Utah, and then ambassador for Obama, what does he know about “herding cats” in Congress to get bills through the House?

Let’s face it–the Speaker of the House should be an elected member of the House. If Republicans brought in some unelected person to be Speaker of the House, third in line to the Presidency, what would prevent the Democrats from doing the same for Bill or Hillary Clinton, or even Obama after he serves his second term?

Since the Democrats will control the Presidency and the Senate for the next two years, the Speaker of the House will be the most powerful Republican. If Republican House members believe that John Boehner is not their best leader, let them present another Representative to replace him, and it would seem that Paul Ryan has the courage and brains to do the job. But if Republicans in the House choose someone else, it would be a better choice than that of the Washington Post.

Steve Z on December 27, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Romney.
Why not Romney for Speaker? Proven ability to negotiate; at least 47% of voters liked him; all the qualifications that he had as a presidential candidate would make him an appealing Speaker.
Hey, if they can put Herman Munster Kerry in as Sec of State, why not Romney for Speaker.

orangemtl on December 27, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Today Obama shows back up to say the House should hold a vote on the dem budget proposal. Obama hasn’t had a single member on either side cast a vote for any of his three budgets and Reid hasn’t even debated any aspect of the two budgets they have passed with bi-partisan support.

Suck it Obama and Reid. Go work on a budget, get it to pass in the senate and get back to us. If it’s not acceptable, debate it until it is or keep sucking.

DanMan on December 27, 2012 at 11:13 AM

To easyt65

It is NOT a ‘Boehner’ Problem – It is a GOP Establishment Vs True Conservatives Vs Obama/Liberals problem:

It is not just the self proclaimed truer conservatives, a lot of people who are articulate, thoughtful, right of center, tea party loving but not Evangelical Christians and thus marginalized by the literature from that group, do not approve of Boehner getting the Speakership based on his seniority in the first place.

Speaker imparts some kind of leadership and communication skill. He is “not a bad guy” but not up to the challenge. I want an end to seniority promotions in the Republican majority House. I want a charismatic leader given the title “Speaker” and not the next guy with power on the list.

I would like Marco Rubio to be Majority leader in the Senate, if we could just get some of these red states together to elect a few more senators. I like Cantor more in the house, than Boehner, but would like to see Paul Ryan there.

But in the insane times in which we live, it would be risky, but novel to Bring Back Newt. Hmmm.

Fleuries on December 27, 2012 at 11:19 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3