Sunday, July 27, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 66 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

Boehner sending small group to Obama meeting

By Associated Press

LAST UPDATED: 10:50 a.m. HST, Oct 09, 2013

WASHINGTON » House Speaker John Boehner's office says a small group of House Republicans will meet with President Barack Obama on Thursday instead of the full caucus that the White House invited.

Boehner spokesman Brendan Buck said today that the meeting is only worthwhile if it's focused on finding a solution to the government shutdown. Buck said only the elected leadership and select committee chairmen will attend — 18 lawmakers out of the 232 invited.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Obama was disappointed that Boehner was "preventing his members from coming to the White House." Carney, pinning blame for the shutdown on House Republicans, said the president wanted to talk directly with "the members who forced this economic crisis on the country about how the shutdown and a failure to pay the country's bills could devastate the economy."

Obama planned to meet this afternoon with the House Democratic caucus. The White House said the president intends to invite senators to talk in the coming days.

Republicans are demanding talks on deficit reduction and Obama's health care law before approving spending legislation. Obama has said he won't negotiate until the budget is approved and the debt ceiling lifted, with no strings attached.

 Print   Email   Comment | View 66 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
Ripoff wrote:
on October 9,2013 | 09:02AM
Ronin006 wrote:
The clown is in the White House.
on October 9,2013 | 09:07AM
Ripoff wrote:
they're all clowns
on October 9,2013 | 10:27AM
hanalei395 wrote:
The bottom line: The Republican clowns say ..."Shutdown Obamacare, or we will continue to shutdown the government".
on October 9,2013 | 11:56AM
thepartyfirst wrote:
Anything run by the Feds, I would stay away from. With the Feds there is no competition, they are the referees and players. Does'nt matter if their are Dems or Repubs. The choice should remain with the private citizen.
on October 9,2013 | 01:28PM
hanalei395 wrote:
That's what Tea Baggers say about the Feds. Their protest signs ....."Keep the Fed's hands off my Social Security and Medicare".
on October 9,2013 | 02:29PM
thepartyfirst wrote:
Isn't that great? Politicians listening to their constituents and the citizens want to heard and not fall in line.
on October 9,2013 | 04:11PM
hanalei395 wrote:
Hey ...thepartyfirst ...........never mind.
on October 9,2013 | 04:38PM
Ronin006 wrote:
You have it wrong, hanale. The Republicans are saying to treat everyone equally under Obamacare. Obama has issued more than 1,000 exemptions and exceptions for members of congress and their staffs, cabinet members and their staffs, the White House and its staff, and to other politically-connected businesses and unions. He also has delayed implementation for one year for corporations employing 50 or more employees, unions and politically connected organizations. Republicans are saying no exceptions and exemptions and to delay for one year the mandate for small businesses and individuals like he did for others in the interest of fairness. What is wrong with that? Why is Obama opposed to doing it?
on October 9,2013 | 02:08PM
hanalei395 wrote:
Members of Congress, their staffs, etc.,etc., have their own health plans. THEY DON'T NEED OBAMACARE. Obamacare are for people WITH NO HEALTH CARE. Got it? .... Again ... Republican clowns say, "Shutdown Obamacare, or will continue to shutdown the government".
on October 9,2013 | 02:20PM
Ronin006 wrote:
Your lack of knowledge about Obamacare is appalling. Members of Congress and their staffs are required to participate in Obamacare. It was a provision reluctantly inserted into the law by Democrats at the insistence of Republicans who argued that if Obamacare was good enough for all Americans, it was good enough for Congress. The law required members of congress and their staffs to give up their government health plans and purchase health insurance from insurance exchanges established by Obamacare and to pay the premiums themselves. About three months ago, late on a Friday night under cover of darkness, Obama granted an exception to members of congress and their staffs to subsidize their health insurance cost, a subsidy not available to others with like incomes. And by the way, Obamacare is not just for people with no health care; it applies to almost all Americans. Got it?
on October 9,2013 | 03:40PM
hanalei395 wrote:
You don't get it. It's PRIMARILY for people with no health care, why Obamacare was created in the first place. But it also may be for people who may want to change their health care. So, in the meantime, don't worry about it. Like Social Security and Medicare, Obamacare is here to stay.
on October 9,2013 | 03:58PM
markat wrote:
Congratulations to all you preppers out there....your time has come.
on October 9,2013 | 10:43AM
Ripoff wrote:
ah crap I didn't have time to install my underground bunker
on October 9,2013 | 12:54PM
busterb wrote:
So I guess whatever our reps want to say won't get heard. So much for fair representation. STOP VOTING PEOPLE, IT'S A WASTE OF TIME! GO BEACH INSTEAD! Idiots.
on October 9,2013 | 09:08AM
serious wrote:
No our reps will not be heard. Have you seen these meetings on TV? Obama likes to hear his voice and completely dominates the conversations with his opinions. They should have a sand hour glass and each person has his/her turn.
on October 9,2013 | 09:20AM
busterb wrote:
I think you are mistaking the Tiger Woods syndrome for what is going on. TV concentrates on what POTUS says, not what 200 reps go on about. Much like how Tiger gets busted all the time when you know other players, the cameras are never on, make mistakes too.
on October 9,2013 | 10:49AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Haven't seen these meetings on TV and neither have you.
on October 9,2013 | 10:50AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Boehner to the bulk of his GOP Caucus: "Don't talk to that man!" "He's baaaaaad." "Daddy and your brothers will handle this." "You young 'uns stay at home." "We'll come back and tell you what happened and what to think about the whole thing." IF the GOP caucus as a whole accedes to this will speak volumes to their home constituents. For all those in Districts except Boehner's chosen 18's they will be unrepresented at the table.
on October 9,2013 | 09:09AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Your comment is juvenile.
on October 9,2013 | 09:44AM
CriticalReader wrote:
No, my comment is about a bunch of legislators being treated like juveniles, and the people in those legislators' districts being treated like juveniles (actually juvenile sheep, so, lambs) by the their vaunted "leader".
on October 9,2013 | 09:58AM
Pacej001 wrote:
The tone and content of your comment is juvenile.
on October 9,2013 | 10:02AM
CriticalReader wrote:
on October 9,2013 | 10:41AM
Pacej001 wrote:
This is a grossly inaccurate overstatement, useful in an argument with someone who isn't willing or able to think. It's called a straw man argument, something that Obama does all the time. In fact, it is just about the only trick in his bag. Why is your statement an over stated inaccurate straw man? 1. There is no republican proposal to abolish Obamacare. 2. The House has no obligation, by the Constitution, to agree with the spending priorities of the current senate OR the president, so all three are equally responsible for a government shutdown if they can't work out a deal through negotiation and compromise. 3. Same argument as #2 regarding responsibility for the economic impacts.---------- Right now, buy refusing to negotiate and compromise, Obama and the Senate have earned first place on the blame line.
on October 9,2013 | 10:54AM
Fred01 wrote:
You should try turning off Fox News parrot.
on October 9,2013 | 11:10AM
CriticalReader wrote:
"This is a grossly inaccurate overstatement," This is a gross example of GOP type dishonesty in the public debate.
on October 9,2013 | 11:24AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Fred: Let me see if I got your opinion right. I'm wrong because Fox News. That it?
on October 9,2013 | 03:44PM
Pacej001 wrote:
CR: Let me see if I've got your well thought out opinion down. I'm wrong because GOP.
on October 9,2013 | 03:46PM
CriticalReader wrote:
No, you're wrong because you write things that the GOP currently says and thinks, and advocate support for things the GOP is doing. For instance, I pointed out above that the GOP position of demanding Obamacare abolition in exchange for re-opening the federal government and/or raising the debt ceiling was not only their position, but also juvenile. You called the mimicking of that postion a grossly inaccurate overstatement". It is neither grossly inaccurate nor an overstatement. It is precisely the GOP position. Therefore, you are wrong to have stated that it was in any way grossly inaccurate or an overstatement. And, in my view, you attempt to do so is a prime and gross example of GOP type dishonesty in public debate. Understand?
on October 9,2013 | 04:01PM
Pacej001 wrote:
The GOP, in the current negotiation, is not demanding that Obamacare be repealed or abolished. They want it delayed for one year. Here are two of the many sources of this FACT. Do I need to read them to you?-------------- 1. From Yahoo news: "The House approved a spending bill early Sunday [ Sept 29] morning that would fund the government through Dec. 15, but tacked on amendments that would delay the federal health care law known as Obamacare for one year and repeal the medical device tax, .... (http://news.yahoo.com/house-republicans-hold-private-weekend-meeting-to-discuss-strategy-to-avoid-government-shutdown-151356907.html)--------------2. CBS News: "On Saturday, after the conference meeting, House GOP leaders scheduled a series of votes that would enable their members to volley an amended bill back to the Senate. That bill would fund the government through Dec. 15, but it would also delay Obamacare's requirement for individuals to purchase health insurance by one year and repeal a tax on medical device manufacturers that helps fund the law.
on October 9,2013 | 04:33PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Justice delayed is justice denied. Obamacare delayed is Obamacare denied. The GOP;s objective, however packaged (either in short term delaying tactic, or outright abolition) is to abolish and defund Obamacare. It has been the consistent message and motivation for the current state of affairs. To suggest otherwise is pure dishonesty.
on October 9,2013 | 04:40PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Well, you got it right. The current GOP demand is to delay Obamacare. Correct. Their long term goal is to repeal it, get rid of it, deep six it, trash it, burn it to the ground, fugidadaboutit. Short of getting rid of it entirely, they will probably want to legislate to change it into something less destructive for the country. This is what political parties do when their constituency demands it. The make changes to or cut the funding for bad Federal programs. What you've been describing as some sort of republican evil is actually the proper functioning of our government.
on October 9,2013 | 04:53PM
CriticalReader wrote:
on October 9,2013 | 05:15PM
Maipono wrote:
Let's hope that this meeting is productive and will spawn many more meetings. Better yet, the president should go down to the Capitol and meet with the congress personally, something that he has been avoiding for the past 5 years.
on October 9,2013 | 09:30AM
ClearHeaded wrote:
Boehner and the other rightist extremists are domestic terrorists. They want to bring down the government and start over using their "ideals". No different than the Taliban. They use legislative violence against certain segments of Americans. No compromising. Our way our we will ruin it for everybody. One thing for sure. No way in h*ll can we let a man who is only half white succeed at being president. That's the end of "our America".
on October 9,2013 | 09:33AM
LanaUlulani wrote:
No. The terrorist is Obama who is using fear to scare the elderly thus possibly giving them a heart attack. Auwe.

Contrary to what Obama wants, in 2006 he voted against raising the debt ceiling:


Now he accuses those who do not want to raise the debt ceiling as "terrorists." He is just that. A terrorist of the worst kine.

The debt ceiling should NOT be raised under ANY circumstance. If it is they will increase their spending and increase OUR taxes. They should CUT their spending and CUT our taxes. That way money in the form of taxes do not go to them (Obama and Congress) it goes to local kids instead!!!

on October 9,2013 | 09:39AM
CriticalReader wrote:
So, what you advocate, LanaUlulani, is that the GOP stop this guy and vote clean CRs and a Clean raise of the debt ceiling limit, right?
on October 9,2013 | 09:59AM
localcitizen wrote:
you really believe this?- wow
on October 9,2013 | 09:44AM
cojef wrote:
I do believe she is on right track. Example: While back a veteran in his 90's wanted to visit the WW II War Memorial and had difficult time doing so, as barriers were placed to prevent wheel-chair access. Yesterday, there was a demonstration staged by foreigners in DC and mounted security forces were present. In one situation a veteran is denied access and the other illegals are given opportunities to demonstrate. Yet, both instances took place during the furlough . Where the justification? An illegal has superior consideration over a veteran paying respects to his fallen comrades. Can't imagine this is happening to a veteran, especially an aged and wheel-chaired individual.
on October 9,2013 | 10:19AM
CriticalReader wrote:
C'mon cojef, we're now talking WORLD ECONOMY. Reminding everyone that the GOP shutout the WWII veterans when they shutdown the federal government not only works against you, it's at best a speck in the eye even if it could legitimately be laid on the President (which it can't if considered with a modicum of intellectual integrity).
on October 9,2013 | 10:49AM
Pacej001 wrote:
Well, congratulations for successfully including, in a single paragraph, every nasty vilification of republicans used by democrats over the last month. I'm sure your mom would be proud. I think the park police blocking veterans access to the WWII memorial may have a job opening for you.
on October 9,2013 | 09:52AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Pace, you still on the closed monument angle??? Wait! Actually, that's the BEST talking point/subterfuge the GOP has. Knda pathetic, I hope even you can admit.
on October 9,2013 | 10:45AM
EightOEight wrote:
Wait, I have another nasty vilification for the Tpublicans. They're upset because two Dems are moving to close down the Congressional gym and spa, which Boehner designated "essential" (search Shutdown Prioritization Act).
on October 9,2013 | 12:47PM
Ronin006 wrote:
EightOEight, what is with the "Tpublican" nonsense? It makes you appear juvenile instead of a serious commenter.
on October 9,2013 | 02:12PM
EightOEight wrote:
It's a more accurate name for the party. Starts with T because they're the ones running the Party. TPers calling the non-TPers RINOS when in fact they are the RINOs. I'm sticking with it. It's not as if you feel any non-conservative comment is serious anyway, right??
on October 9,2013 | 02:36PM
CriticalReader wrote:
"what is with the "Tpublican" nonsense?" It's a clever blend of "Tea Party" and "Republican" designed to convey the message that the Republican Party has been overtaken by the Tea Party. People trying to make a point often create quippy names to convey their views on things, or to influence people's opinions on things. Sometimes they are effective, sometimes they backfire, and sometimes they serve to reveal ignorance. A good example is found, for instance, when the comedians go out on the streets and ask people, "Which do you like better, "Obamacare" or the Affordable Health Care Act?" And the idiots respond, "the Affordable Health Care Act."
on October 9,2013 | 04:19PM
HonoluluHawaii wrote:
"Obama says he won't negotiate until the budget is approved with no strings attached." That almost has never happened. I also read that there has been no budget since 1997, which goes across a Republican and Democratic Administration. If one has the mindset of a person or business about to file for bankruptcy, a budget does not matter. I hope this country will survive.
on October 9,2013 | 10:18AM
CriticalReader wrote:
"That almost has never happened." Are you almost certain about that?
on October 9,2013 | 10:51AM
CriticalReader wrote:
Boehner: "WE WANT TO NEGOTIATE!!!" Obama: "Ok, everyone come down to the White House." Boehner: "Uuuuuuuh NO! Not everyone". Obama: I though you all want to negotiate? Boehner: "Uuuuuuh when I said "we" I meant me and 18 guys". Obama: "You mean 219 don't want to negotiate?" Boehner: "NO! WE WANT TO NEGOTIATE!". Obama: "Fine everyone come on down." Boehner: "NO!" Obama: "Why not" Boehner: "BECAUSE! . . . the others might hear what you have to say."
on October 9,2013 | 11:55AM
EightOEight wrote:
on October 9,2013 | 12:39PM
AhiPoke wrote:
If you're going hypothetical how about: Boehner - "WE WANT TO NEGOTIATE!!!" Obama - "Ok, everyone come down to the White House. BTW, I'll only negotiate if you first agree to everything that I propose. Also, I think you're a terrorist, you hate this country and your dog is ugly. Let's be friends, I'll buy lunch."
on October 9,2013 | 01:58PM
EightOEight wrote:
Ok, first you guys were mad at him for negotiating with terrorists while snubbing Tpublicans, and now you're mad at him for holding out an olive branch to Tpublican terrorists. Come on, make up your minds! And he never said their dogs were ugly...that's an outright lie.
on October 9,2013 | 02:57PM
AhiPoke wrote:
Really? He never called Boehner's dog ugly? LOL, lighten up your taking your democratic talking points way too seriously.
on October 9,2013 | 04:05PM
EightOEight wrote:
I wasn't being serious LOL ( although I usually am when it comes to ugly dogs).
on October 9,2013 | 04:12PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Once again, GOP type spin and mischaracterization. What Obama really said once was, "my, your wife looks beautiful in that dress." The GOP lunatics are so reflexively mistrusting of Obama, and have such a bad tendency to let their subconscious motivations slip, they immediately heard an "insult" of a GOP "dog". The pathology of the GOP subconscious at work? Once again, cannot hear anything Obama says correctly, and view women as "dogs" to be controlled on leashes.
on October 9,2013 | 04:46PM
Ronin006 wrote:
Get serious, Critical Thinker. Meeting with all members of the Republican caucus would not be negotiating, it would be campaigning, which seems to be the only thing Obama knows how to do. Negotiating is done between leaders from both sides.
on October 9,2013 | 02:24PM
EightOEight wrote:
See what I mean? He didn't even call them Tpublicans and you're telling him to get serious...
on October 9,2013 | 02:58PM
CriticalReader wrote:
The Democrats already tried that with the so called "leader" Boehner. He reneged. That's why there was no clean CR in the first place. Because Boehner reneged. IF Boehner is the only one who can negotiate for the House GOP, then Obama is absolutely correct not to negotiate with him. He's not a man of his word at worst, or a man who can't deliver on his promises at best. Boehner's only meaningful (and dubious) role in all of this is to renege and refuse to hold an up and down vote on a clean CR, and no a clean debt ceiling increase. Negotiation or even talking face-to-face with him appears to be useless.
on October 9,2013 | 04:09PM
Ronin006 wrote:
On what did Boehner renege?
on October 9,2013 | 07:11PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56vNKLMupmI
on October 9,2013 | 07:58PM
Pacej001 wrote:
The open air monuments and parks are being closed for no reason other than spite. Check your news sources if you don't believe me.
on October 9,2013 | 03:53PM
CriticalReader wrote:
Because the Tea Party led GOP's federal government shutdown strategy got large portions of the national park service maintenance and ranger staff furloughed. So not enough staff to clean up after the visitors or monitor their conduct inside the boundaries of the monuments.
on October 9,2013 | 04:35PM
Pacej001 wrote:
Well, they sure seem to be able to make arrest, which have happened at the Vietnam Memorial. Sir, you cover your shame with rationalization.
on October 9,2013 | 04:55PM
CriticalReader wrote:
I think that's Park Police who did the arresting. Not the rangers or maintenance staff. The bottom line, though, is that if the GOP is going to shut down the government, as it has, then government facilities and physical areas of supervisory responsibility are going to be shut down. Of course, the GOP wants to "pick and choose" what can and cannot happen or open in the Federal government. But, it needs to get a veto proof majority in both houses in order to do that. Otherwise, attempts to try to do that by holding hostage a nation's governmental operations and economic welfare not only begets the direct effect of closure of federally operated things (including monuments), but also equals domestic terrorism - in case you thought I'd relented on that view.
on October 9,2013 | 05:11PM
Maipono wrote:
Lots of akamai readers on this board, and a few Obama sycophants that keep mocking and name calling individuals who have a different point of view. Too bad they are taking a cue from our president who is encouraging this with his constant vilification of Americans that are exercising our rights to disagree with him.
on October 9,2013 | 03:59PM
false wrote:
Why is only sending short guys?
on October 9,2013 | 04:00PM
Breaking News
Political Radar
On policy

Warrior Beat
Apple fallout

Wassup Wit Dat!
Can You Spock ‘Em?

Warrior Beat
Meal plan

Volley Shots
Fey, Enriques on MJNT

Political Radar
Wilhelmina Rise, et al.

Court Sense
Cold War