Why would Democrats agree to protect the Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner, from his opponents in the GOP? That’s a really good question. Perhaps this explains it a little:
A number of right-wing Republicans, long wary of Boehner’s commitment to GOP efforts attacking President Obama’s policy priorities, have openly considered a coup in an attempt to transfer the gavel into more conservative hands.
But Democrats from across an ideological spectrum say they’d rather see Boehner remain atop the House than replace him with a more conservative Speaker who would almost certainly be less willing to reach across the aisle in search of compromise. Replacing him with a Tea Party Speaker, they say, would only bring the legislative process — already limping along — to a screeching halt.
Yes. That’s one way of putting it. Boehner is preferable because he is willing to “compromise.” Fantastic. I couldn’t believe Boehner wasn’t already ousted by the new Republican majority. Well, I could believe it. But I was still very unhappy about it. Boehner has a history of mealy-mouthed middle-of-the-road jellyfish politics. From Obamacare to “gay” “marriage” to executive amnesty, Boehner has proved he is incapable of standing for anything. In fact, he has refused to take the Political Courage test from “Project Vote Smart.” This is the notice they posted about him on their site:
John Boehner has refused to provide voters with positions on key issues covered by the 2014 Political Courage Test, despite repeated requests. John Boehner is still welcome to submit the test at any time.
So, he doesn’t want anyone to know where he stands. It makes it easier for him to stand wherever the sunshine is. In that sense, I guess he is a fitting Speaker for the House. Because the majority of our House Republicans are compromising traitors to conservative ideals as well.