Resign as Speaker

John Boehner has failed as a leader of the Speaker of the House. He has done so on a more critical issue than Nancy Pelosi or Dennis Hassert ever did.

The failure to vote on a plan last night, days before the deadline for default, shows that the Speaker has been gambling without even checking what cards were in his hand. He went all in and he failed. And when you do that, there should be a consequence.

I do not think Boehner has committed a malfeasance that would make him ineligible for office. But in the first true test of his leadership, his leadership fell short. For the man leading the so-called party of personal responsibility, there is only one realistic option.

Redstate today says the market crash today is because of "Obamanomics," and not because of what happened in the House yesterday. It is just weird timing, I guess, that the discovery of this mysterious economic philosophy would happen

Mitch McConnell is on TV right now saying the Democrats should come up with a philosophy that majorities in both chambers would agree too, but the Speaker of the House cannot even get a plan that members of his own caucus will support. It seems to me McConnell, who has been compared to Pontius Pilot by his supporters, is not reading the landscape so well.

The only hope at this point is that Boehner will step aside and a new Speaker will take a Senate-passed plan and put it to a vote. This, of course, would do what McConnell demands because it would get all Democratic House members to support it and get the responsible Republican House members who want to avoid default to vote in favor of a Democratic plan.

Republican leadership needs to realize right now that they have lost this game. The deadline is looming. If the Senate can pass a plan and the House cannot, it does no good for the GOP-controlled House to reject the only plan on the table. The gaming is over. It is time for a plan.

Boehner failed to hold his own caucus together. He walked out of talks with a Democratic president. He has used up all of his credibility with the left, and then used up all of his credibility on the right. It is time for him to fade into the background of Washington politics.

Debt Less Important Than Jobs

I have heard so much belly-aching in the past few weeks about how the reason America's economy is in the tank is because of our debt. I call bullshit.

First off, this is a new philosophy for Republicans. Dick Cheney famously said that deficits don't matter, back when the most important thing the White House wanted to do was give tax cuts to billionaires. Come to think of it, that still seems to be the top priority, even as these supposed budget hawks complain about the debt.

But it is painfully obvious that the biggest problem with the U.S. economy today is unemployment. People only want to talk about that when they are taking political digs at one another. But one thing I think Democrats have failed to iterate well with the public during these debt ceiling arguments is that the only way to reduce government spending and start chipping at the debt is to fire massive numbers of people who work for the government or strip benefits from those who get money from the government.

The Republicans seem to understand this when they say you have to keep subsidizing big oil, maintaining a frankly delusional belief in trickle-down economics even with people who already make more money than they know how to spend. But giving money to people who will actually circulate their dollars through the economy, even if they dare use their dollars to cool their family or buy an X-Box, seems anathema to the 'eat the poor' right running the House.

Firing people won't help the economy. It will make it worse. Cutting off welfare checks won't help the economy. It will make it worse. Raising the unemployment rate will hurt the president. But it will make the economy much, much worse. I am afraid Republicans are willing to endure 18 months of economic disaster if it means putting the economy back on poor footing and gives then a shot at ousting Barack Obama from the White House.

But if I give them the benefit of the doubt and believe this really is a philosophical divide, then I think Obama and the Democrats need to spend more time selling that the economy is not about individuals. It is an easy sell for Republicans to say giving welfare checks is wrong because people didn't work for it, but it misses the greater impact of those checks. Telling the poor they shouldn't spend their money on frivolous consumer goods doesn't help the guy working at the local electronics shop or Wal-Mart. It hurts them.

I don't care if you think everybody on welfare is some alcoholic hobo who doesn't deserve a government check. Fine. I disagree but that's politics. But if it more important to deny that person money than it is to make sure this country doesn't risk default or a drop in credit rating, then I think you are wrong on multiple fronts. One, you are wrong to refuse to negotiate, and I think Republicans who refuse to work with Democrats are spitting in the eye of democracy even as they bellow about the wisdom of the founding fathers.

But I think you also fail to recognize that the economy won't get in fighting shape until people have jobs and money to spend, and firing government employees while cutting benefits and entitlements fails the system as a whole just to get some digs at a part you find unattractive.