Paul Ryan agrees to be House Speaker -- if certain conditions are met

[fhl]

Let's read the statement in context of the reality...

Here it is from Reuters...

Ryan to run for House Speaker if he can unify Republicanb
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/21/us-usa-congress-speaker-idUSKCN0SE2KI20151021

'But Ryan laid down conditions that could anger the conservatives. He said he wanted a House rules change that would remove the ability of any member of the chamber to seek a vote to eject the speaker.

Such a threat, coming from conservatives, was hanging over Boehner in the weeks before he announced his resignation, effective Oct. 30.

According to King, Ryan said: "I am willing to take arrows in the chest, but I won't take them in the back".'


Conditions are being laid down so the Freedom Caucus will be powerless to eject the speaker or to oppose him in any manner. That's the bottom line - the Tea Party conservatives are being handed a harsh lesson.

Trying to make the rule changes as something the Freedom Caucus advocated for and that Ryan is simply adopting their agenda.... simply is not true.

The rule change I emboldened is what he agreed to. That's why I emboldened it.

As far as Ryan demanding other things, what difference does that make? He can demand the sun moon and stars and it doesn't mean a thing if the Freedom Caucus tells him to f off.

You seem to be wedded to this idea that the rinos win if they demand something. You and the "mainstream media". They only win if they get the votes. And they don't have the votes, and they haven't won anything. They have lost, big time. As in, Boehner and Mccarthy.

Real votes are all that matter and I'm not going to argue anymore about whether the Freedom Caucus is 'down on their knees' just because the rinos made some ludicrous demands of them.

 

[gwb-trading]

The rule change I emboldened is what he agreed to. That's why I emboldened it.

As far as Ryan demanding other things, what difference does that make? He can demand the sun moon and stars and it doesn't mean a thing if the Freedom Caucus tells him to f off.

You seem to be wedded to this idea that the rinos win if they demand something. You and the "mainstream media". They only win if they get the votes. And they don't have the votes, and they haven't won anything. They have lost, big time. As in, Boehner and Mccarthy.

Real votes are all that matter and I'm not going to argue anymore about whether the Freedom Caucus is 'down on their knees' just because the rinos made some ludicrous demands of them.

The minute the Freedom Caucus accepts Ryan's demands, they are completely under his thumb.

If the Freedom Caucus tells Ryan to F'of then they enjoy many more months of Boehner while they are stripped of all their committee assignments.

 

[fhl]

The minute the Freedom Caucus accepts Ryan's demands, they are completely under his thumb.

If the Freedom Caucus tells Ryan to F'of then they enjoy many more months of Boehner while they are stripped of all their committee assignments.

LOL. the minute the rinos go back to 'regular order' in the House, they are completely under the Freedom Caucus thumb.

Like I said. Only votes count. Blathering about how the rinos win every time they make a demand only looks desperate and pathetic.

 

[gwb-trading]

LOL. the minute the rinos go back to 'regular order' in the House, they are completely under the Freedom Caucus thumb.

Like I said. Only votes count. Blathering about how the rinos win every time they make a demand only looks desperate and pathetic.

I disagree with you. We will see how it plays out.

 

[gwb-trading]

We did capture this portrayal of the Freedom Caucus...

 

[gwb-trading]

and this future vision of Speaker Ryan at work...

 

[Ricter]

If they agree it looks like all win for the American public. No government shutdowns over fraudulent Planned Parenthood scandals, no credit rating hit over ignorance about the debt ceiling, etc.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

In your dreams gwb.

I see no compelling reason why the Freedom Caucus should cave to the demands of a guy they surely do not want as Speaker. The idea that he will require total loyalty is downright weird. Or he will do what? What will this little brat do if his expectations aren't met? Throw a tantrum?

Ryan is among the worst choices possible for Speaker. A beta male narcissist with a penchant for screwing core republican constituencies and sucking up to the media.

I hope the Freedom Caucus laughs in his face and tells him to f off.

 

[gwb-trading]

In your dreams gwb.

I see no compelling reason why the Freedom Caucus should cave to the demands of a guy they surely do not want as Speaker. The idea that he will require total loyalty is downright weird. Or he will do what? What will this little brat do if his expectations aren't met? Throw a tantrum?

Ryan is among the worst choices possible for Speaker. A beta male narcissist with a penchant for screwing core republican constituencies and sucking up to the media.

I hope the Freedom Caucus laughs in his face and tells him to f off.

I actually agree with you to a point. It would be unwise for the Freedom Caucus to cave into Ryan's demands and lose their significance & power in the House. My understanding is that they have a Friday deadline to agree to the demands. It would be best for the conservatives if they told Ryan to take a flying leap.

I also question Ryan's effectiveness and ability as the Speaker. Only time will tell (assuming he is elected).

However I will state that anyone viewing electing Ryan as Speaker with the associated demands as some sort of victory for the conservatives is completely off base in my opinion.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Fhl's point is that the Freedom Caucus doesn't have enough votes to elect one of their own. So if they can get one of their key demands met, that is a reasonable goal for them. Better than to come away with nothing, which is what they have with Boehner. The bitter fact is the majority of House republicans are more interested in log rolling for the Chamber of Commerce than opposing Obama.

Ryan's claim to fame is that he is supposed to be a deep thinker on various intractable issues, like entitlement reform, ie cutting benefits for republican voters. Then there is tax reform, ie raising taxes on republican coters. Or immigration reform, ie letting an invasion of immigrants overwhelm republican voters.

Why republican voters would support any of that escapes me, but I'm not a deep thinker. Say what you will about the democrats, but it is a cold day in hell when they sell out or abandon their supporters. The last time they did it was Clinton pushing NAFTA.