Times Online

The mother who brought down the Fort Hood killer

 0
Fox Boston

Barney Frank present during marijuana bust

0
Merc. News

Feinstein still pondering Calif. gubernatorial bid

0
Big Govt

Obama’s Shock Troops: SEIU and Political Intimidation in St. Louis

 0
NYT

Broader Measure of Unemployment Stands at 17.5%

0
All Headlines »
 

New House Majority leader

Posted by: Sister Toldjah on February 2, 2006 at 3:08 pm

U.S. Rep. John Boehner of Ohio. Via Reuters:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Rep. John Boehner of Ohio upset a former deputy to indicted Texan Tom DeLay on Thursday to become majority leader of the scandal-rocked U.S. House of Representatives.

Rep. Roy Blunt had appeared to be the front-runner, based on a long list of public commitments, but Boehner, who campaigned on a vow to seek to renew the party’s “spirit and vision,” defeated Blunt and Rep. John Shadegg of Arizona in a secret election by fellow Republicans.

Boehner had 122 votes to Blunt’s 109. Shadegg dropped out after a first ballot loss.

Boehner’s election represented a shake-up in the House leadership, as Republicans effectively gave a vote of no-confidence to Blunt, the acting majority leader and a close ally of DeLay.

Thoughts?

In: Breaking News Stories, Politics | Email This Post | Print This

RSS feed for comments on this post.

26 Responses to “New House Majority leader”

Comments

  1. jeff says:
    February 2, 2006 at 3:11 pm

    http://www.dccc.org/houseofscandal/members/JohnBoehnerOH-8.html

  2. blogagog says:
    February 2, 2006 at 3:57 pm

    I think Reuters has it wrong. A vote for Shadegg would have represented a shake-up in the House leadership. Boehner is just more of the same (I hope I’m wrong!). Oh well, better than Blunt. I don’t trust that guy, although I can’t point to anything specific. He seems spiteful.

  3. steve says:
    February 2, 2006 at 4:04 pm

    John Boehner handed out checks on the House floor obtained from lobbyists and given to House members who had voted the correct way on the lobbyists bills. He was told that his behavior was illegal and immoral so he stopped. The currupt Republican leadership is clueless. Peace

  4. Justin Thibault says:
    February 2, 2006 at 4:10 pm

    Does anybody think it’s weird that the guy’s name is “Boehner”

    Having been called “T-Bone” on more than one occassion, I can sympathize with the guy.

  5. Justin Thibault says:
    February 2, 2006 at 4:29 pm

    Oops, I’ve just been informed it’s rhymes with “explainer”…not so much a reformer.

  6. Severian says:
    February 2, 2006 at 4:50 pm

    I was really hoping for Shadeqq, but the result doesn’t surprise me.

  7. Bachbone says:
    February 2, 2006 at 6:32 pm

    “The currupt [sic] Republican leadership is clueless.” Steve, at least the GOP showed DeLay the leadership door though he had not been convicted of a thing. And the evidence is Mr. Earle’s indictment was highly politically motivated.

    Since numerous Democrats got checks from Abramoff’s clients, too, and many have refused to give them back, would you not say that is “clueless,” as well? (I can’t wait for Democrats to push the Abramoff matter to an investigation, because a lot of well placed members of their own party are headed for the spotlight, too.)

    Contrast DeLay’s demise with how Clinton was treated by Democrats after he perjured himself. How many members of his administration criticized his lying and illegal activities, resigned in protest, or apologized to any of the victims? How many stood on the Capitol steps before the TV cameras and shouted what a fine man Clinton was? How many of Clinton’s buddies went to prison?

    Boehner was not my choice for the position, but until he has shown he hasn’t learned his lesson, the benefit of doubt goes to him. I’ll quickly join criticism of him if he doesn’t clean up the place.

  8. jeff says:
    February 2, 2006 at 6:58 pm

    “Steve, at least the GOP showed DeLay the leadership door though he had not been convicted of a thing.”

    Sorry to rain on your parade, Bachbone, but under existing House rules, DeLay or any GOP leader would be required to leave a leadership position if indicted on charges that carry a potential sentence of two or more years in prison. It wasn’t a noble deed done by honorable men. It’s the rules.

  9. steve says:
    February 2, 2006 at 8:15 pm

    My solution is to vote every sitting politician out of office in November. I’m non-partisan. Peace

  10. AkaDad says:
    February 2, 2006 at 9:25 pm

    Looks like Boehner, the new GOP leader, is a Theocrat.

    LINKa>

  11. Kjoe says:
    February 2, 2006 at 9:46 pm

    Re: T-Bone’s comment, as Salon magazine put it: “Stop five people in a supermarket and it is unlikely you’ll find one who can pronounce the name of Ohio Rep. John Boehner free of embarrassment (it’s BAY-nor)…”

    Whew! Hate to talk serious politics while having to refer to the House Majority Leader as “a bodily appendage with a firm conviction,” if you catch my drift.

  12. Baklava says:
    February 2, 2006 at 9:59 pm

    AkaDad,

    ooooh. Scary. I’m scared of criminals er… I mean Theocrats. They are people I fear…

    /end sarcasm and obsessive fear

  13. PCD says:
    February 3, 2006 at 8:09 am

    It is a GOP caucus rule, not a House rule. The Democrats keep their criminals in their leadership positions, especially in the Senate. Think Kennedy, Rockefeller, Reid, Kerry.

    Current House leader who shouldn’t be, Jim McDermott, D-WA.

  14. jeff says:
    February 3, 2006 at 10:25 am

    GOP Pushes Rule Change to Protect DeLay’s Post

    By Charles Babington
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Wednesday, November 17, 2004; Page A01

    House Republicans proposed changing their rules last night to allow members indicted by state grand juries to remain in a leadership post, a move that would benefit Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) in case he is charged by a Texas grand jury that has indicted three of his political associates, according to GOP leaders…

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54572-2004Nov16.html

    Oh, what noble men!

  15. Severian says:
    February 3, 2006 at 10:43 am

    Just trying to level the playing field Jeff. The corrupt democrats don’t have a similar rule…gee, wonder why?

  16. blogagog says:
    February 3, 2006 at 11:17 am

    That law where a Republican can’t be in charge if he’s indicted actually makes no sense at all, and the Democrats were smart not to apply it to themselves.

    I mean, you can’t hold a position if you are suspected of wrongdoing? Half of America suspects all Republicans or all Democrats of wrongdoing!

  17. andrew says:
    February 3, 2006 at 11:37 am

    “The corrupt democrats don’t have a similar rule…gee, wonder why?”

    They don’t need it.

  18. Baklava says:
    February 3, 2006 at 11:37 am

    Jeff? Jeff? Jeff?

    Any attacking rhetoric after finding that info out from the non-mainstream press?

  19. Baklava says:
    February 3, 2006 at 11:40 am

    Andrew laughingly with his head in the sand wrote, “They don’t need it.”

    Are you telling us with that naked face of yours that Democrats don’t get indicted or convicted?

    What are you saying? That even though they do get indicted and convicted they don’t need it because they were wrongly convicted?

    What are you saying? Please give us more than the one liner partisan politic rhetoric with no facts to back you up…

  20. andrew says:
    February 3, 2006 at 12:12 pm

    “Are you telling us with that naked face of yours that Democrats don’t get indicted or convicted?”

    When a democratic leader gets indicted and doesn’t step down we can talk about whether the democrats need the rule or not. The GOP needs it because otherwise DeLay would not have stepped down.

  21. Bachbone says:
    February 3, 2006 at 12:19 pm

    The GOP defeated the misguided (in my view) attempt to change the rule about serving in a leadership position if indicted. Not being a Pollyanna, I admit there are dunderheaded conservative politicians as well as dunderheaded liberal politicians. However, many conservatives accept the previous proposition and call their dunderheads to task, while liberals defend their dunderheads even when objective evidence, such as a stained dress, is “Exhibit A.”

  22. Baklava says:
    February 3, 2006 at 12:20 pm

    Need to do some more research Andrew – instead of keeping your head in the sand…..(though I know you are focusing on this last 12 months only)

    Also take note.

  23. Severian says:
    February 3, 2006 at 12:25 pm

    Pelosi was recently fined $35,000 by the FEC after being found guilty of violating federal campaign finance laws, just for one example. She’s still in her position. The Democrats are the real party of corruption, which is why they won’t adopt the same rules the Republicans operate under.

    But to true believers like Andrew, the important thing was to get Delay out, on a manufactured charge, as he was effective, and for revenge for the redistricting of Texas. The politics of personal destruction, honed to a fine art by cynical Democrats.

  24. Baklava says:
    February 3, 2006 at 12:43 pm

    When someone is indicted it doesn’t mean they are guilty either. Except in the court of public opinion…

    You doin’ that research Andrew?

  25. andrew says:
    February 3, 2006 at 1:06 pm

    “The Democrats are the real party of corruption, which is why they won’t adopt the same rules the Republicans operate under.”

    Why would you corrupt the minority party? What does buying a democrat buy you? Ineffectual whining?

    “You doin’ that research Andrew? ”

    Research on what? administrative proceedings against Pelosi?

  26. PCD says:
    February 3, 2006 at 1:22 pm

    Oh, we all know andrew is just trolling the net looking for more Republicans to smear. Maybe what andrew should do is look up the pending ethics charges against democrats like Jim McDermott.

    No, I don’t think andrew is that honest.