John Boehner Shows Off His Callousness While Berating Unemployed Americans

boehner-memoWhenever Republicans try to pretend to care about average Americans, I usually just laugh. Time and time again members of the Republican party show what disdain they really have for the vast majority of Americans.

Sure, they mask this disdain in often well-worded propaganda that those who don’t like to think for themselves eat right up. But for those of us who like to actually think for ourselves and analyze what’s going on, their policies prove just how little they care about most Americans.

Take for instances comments recently made about unemployed Americans by the “head Republican,” Speaker of the House John Boehner.

While speaking about the unemployed Boehner said, “This idea that has been born, maybe out of the economy over the last couple years, that you know, I really don’t have to work. I don’t really want to do this. I think I’d rather just sit around. This is a very sick idea for our country. If you wanted something you worked for it. Trust me, I did it all.”

As if unemployed Americans are just lazy moochers sitting back living extravagant lifestyles.

I always love when Republicans roll out this absurd notion that most unemployed Americans are just unmotivated bums not wanting to work. Are there people who do abuse unemployment and government benefits? Of course. But for Boehner to basically insinuate that most unemployed Americans just don’t want to work is ridiculous.

Besides, trickle-down economics has been going strong for well over three decades now; when exactly does it start to “trickle down”? But that’s a topic for another article.

Anyone who supports Boehner, and this kind of right-wing nonsense, should be ashamed of themselves. Comments such as these serve no other purpose than to stir up feelings of anger and hate toward those who are struggling in this country to find employment.

Yet Boehner is attacking these Americans to “fire up conservative voters” heading into this November’s midterm elections.

Then again, this is what Republicans typically like to do. Disgustingly attack some of the most vulnerable among us for their own political gains.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • chaserblue

    These turnips made all sorts about promises about jobs, and they’d work to bring in the jobs…it was their “contract with America”, their campaign platform. They have not done one solitary thing for jobs, except whine about Obama. They refuse to pass any work bills, they refuse to help vets, teachers, fire and police personnel. They blocked bills that would put Americans to work fixing our crumbling infrastructure. About the only thing they HAVE done besides go on vacation and give themselves raises, is attack and try to shut down the Affordable Health Care Act over 50 times, block Obama at every turn and attack women’s health along with gay marriage. So it’s easy to see why this tool would attack Americans that can’t get work. It deflects his culpability in the entire fustercluck that is the government today.

    • strayaway

      Besides federal agencies like the FBI, operating Washington, D.C., and the military, what delegated power does the federal government have to “help teachers, fire, and police personnel”? Local and state schools, police, and police personnel are provided for at the state and local levels. Maybe local Republicans could be criticized if there are cuts to those agencies but that is not something to fault Boehner for. My faults with Boehner are more that he capitulates to the President and the US Chamber of Commerce too often. For instance, he just voted in support of the President’s screwy plan to to fund Syrian rebels, supports the Obama/US Chamber of Commerce amnesty bill to flood the labor market with cheap labor, supports Obama’s TPP proposal, and stacks food and drug regulation agencies with Monsanto executives. Median household income has dropped $2,300 since 2009 and family health insurance has increased instead of dropping $2,500 in price as promised. According to the National Employment Law Project, wages are down across all occupations. According to the law of supply and demand, this should be expected. With leaders like Obama and Boehner, this is no surprise.

      • Cemetery Girl

        Actually, there is precident for the federal government to create work programs. It was done in the 30’s. My gr- grandfather worked in a program; he worked paving major roads that were the main routes through rural areas connecting cities. I’m not saying that is the answer, but our infrastructure systems are in a troubling state.

      • strayaway

        I realize there are precedents. I was just referencing the 10th Amendment which seems to have been torn out of Democrats’, and many Republicans’ copies of the Constitution and substituted with court rulings and ‘settled law’. I voted for higher school millage taxes the last two times they appeared on my ballot by the way but wish the federal government would shrink itself to its delegated powers. We would be better off without a federal debt and all these unnecessary wars.

      • Stephen Barlow

        Then STOP VOTING GOP!!!

      • Nemisis

        Unfortunately for some of those roads, that was the last time any work was done on them.

      • Cemetery Girl

        Some of them probably are in dire need of work. I know the vague area he worked on (in WV), and while expressway systems have reduced the national traffic on these (now) locally used roads, which where he worked are heavily used by logging and gas/oil trucks. The scary part is the bridges and dams, even some water lines. Many water lines across the country are so old. Too many bridges and dams have sadly low safety ratings. They’re falling apart, but since they haven’t failed they’re considered good enough. Scary.

      • Nemisis

        In 2010 the Federal government gave states a combined $527.1 Billion in grants for among other things education, infrastructure, and public services such as fire and police.

      • strayaway

        Roosevelt had a cooperative Congress and eventually his own Court but never did get the economy going until WWII came along. 17% unemployment after six years of a Democratic President and Congress falls short of “happy days are here again”. I think the variable is policy rather than party. Roosevelt and Obama’s policies largely failed although Roosevelt’s TVA and Hydro projects paid for themselves many times over. President Obama chose not to use much of his stimulus money on infrastructure projects because there were complaints that too high a percentage of infrastructure jobs were male. So instead he gave stimulus money to local school systems and other unionized local government workers. Too bad today’s Democrats are tearing some of Roosevelt’s dams out. Harding/Coolidge outperformed Bush/Obama and Hoover/Roosevelt with better policies. Wages are not going up until free trade and excessive immigration are controlled. Something like 80% of the new jobs in the Obama “recovery” have gone to aliens. I should get back to Boehner on this thread. He is no better and doesn’t even make pretenses about helping working people like Obama does. If you want to talk about wars though, how about the two wars, against IS and Syria, Obama and Boehner just committed us to?

      • Stephen Barlow

        Harding Coolidge was a post war BOOMTIME. K. No comparison possible.

      • Nemisis

        Your take on what the president is actually able do is interesting. Congress is the entity charged with spending the money. The president can say I want this or that but congress is the one signing the checks. Congress has decided in the case of this president to not do anything the president wants to do and has in some cases actually reversed what it wanted to do simply because the president was going to ok it.
        Roosevelt did not have a “cooperative” congress. What he had was leverage on congress and that scared congress and lead to presidential term limits. I agree that the war effort changed the economic situation in America. The unemployment rate was closer to 24% at the apex of the depression and public works did a great deal to ease the suffering. They alone did not fix the problem.
        This is as you said, fixed with the war. I won’t debate the reason we joined the wars. (it was two during ww2, EU and PAC)
        A result of ww2 was a congressional mandate that the military strength of the US be that we be able to fight on two fronts and still be able to defend the nation at home.

        ISIS, ISIL, IS whatever. they are a threat because they hold no treaties with anyone.
        They are not a nation with which we can even legally treatise with. They have demonstrated a willingness to attack and kill unarmed civilians of any race, greed, ethnicity, religion, age, gender, and basically anyone who is not them. The terrorists, ISIL, need to be removed. They have no redeeming values.
        Which is not true of most Muslims…or Christians, or Jews…or anyone.
        The safety of the region, and the world rests on the eradication of ISIL.
        Going back into Iraq. Not Obama’s fault.
        I place that blame squarely on the shoulders of the people that convinced Papa Bush to stop Schwarzkopf in 1990.

      • strayaway

        I agree that Congress is supposed to determine spending but when the President overrides congressional laws with executive orders (unconstitutional legislation) that incur huge debts and contributes to starting wars in Ukraine, the Levant, Libya, and Syria, it leads to additional debt.

        Roosevelt had a solid Democratic House and Senate, having as much as a 3-1 advantage over Republicans, for the entire duration of his tenure yet unemployment remained at Detroit levels. Harding, by comparison started out with over 11% unemployment and reduced it to 3.6% in two years by cutting federal spending. Keynesians would say that was impossible. I think unemployment started at about 29% early on on the Roosevelt administration so a Harding to Obama comparison would be be more relevant.

        Note that I mentioned that Boehner and Obama are starting two wars. The Iraq war is a byproduct of 1) Bush and every one who voted to give him power to make the decision to attack Saddam. That includes Hillary and Kerry. 2) Obama covertly supplying Syrian rebels with weapons to overthrow Assad. Those weapons wound up in IS hands and propelled IS. Obama did not have the OK of Congress for doing so. Boehner was mute.

        Last weeks’ vote to give Syrian rebels funding is the vote I disdain. Boehner voted yes. The rebels are rebelling against Assad not IS. IS and any “rebels” this money is going to are each other’s allies. Our ally against IS in this neighborhood is Assad whom our idiots in Congress just gave money to help overthrow. It would have made sense to help Assad and the Kurds fight IS but giving money to overthrow Assad is the same mistake Bush made in Iraq and Obama made in Libya and the mistake Obama already made inadvertently arming Syrian rebels.

      • Nemisis

        I won’t argue that congress was Dem oriented during FDR’s terms. It was however not a friendly congress for FDR. What they did not do was obstruct each other in the manner being done now.

        As for unemployment:

        FDR 1944 1.2% lowest in the 20th century.
        year Rate
        1932 23.6 <– Not even president yet, that won't
        1934 21.7 happen till 1933.
        1934 21.7
        1936 16.9
        1938 19.0
        1940 14.6
        1942 4.7
        1944 1.2 A reduction of 22.4 points

        You said:
        " President overrides congressional laws with executive orders (unconstitutional legislation) that incur huge debts and contributes to starting wars in Ukraine, the Levant, Libya, and Syria, it leads to
        additional debt."

        Obama. Is responsible for the war in the Ukraine?
        Well with Boehner. Obama. The US President.
        Not Putin, the Russian President. Not the former President of the Ukraine that embezzled the national treasury and fled to Russia. Obama, and Boehner did all that. Because…Obamacare?
        Libya, the country being run by a semi-retarded sycophant who's people had finally had enough of his brand of despotism. Boehner and Obama.
        The Levant, Obama has been busy these last 6-8 thousand years. Syria, a small less well known strip of land located…in the Levant. All Obama and Boehner's fault. Two people that can't agree on which side of the cup to drink from have collaborated on a massive scale to destabilize Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa.
        By utilizing the Obama Pen of Power. Beginning sometime prior to either of them being conceived.
        ISIL is using US weapon systems captured from Iraqi forces who Bush trained. Hillary and Kerry both had zero input on Bubba Bush kicking in the Saddam's Door. Bubba Bush signed off on SOFA, probably because he was sleeping on one.
        Back that Bus up and you have Clinton the Billary variety who kept pressure on Saddam but did not finish the job started by Papa Bush who failed to remove Saddam from power. Which upset a few people. However mostly not the right ones.
        Asshat…Assad is another dictator who likes his elections with the smell of cordite. His very own people do not like him that much. I hear he pees in the pool. Kadaffy…Long time enemy of the US suddenly switches gears and really wants to be our buddy. Why? Who gives a shit. Okay that guy does. So Momar is getting wind of the rising distrust he has fostered among his peasants and begins to rub our back. You fell for that?

        The US bloodies Libya's nose every 40-60 years.

        In '85 we sank it's entire fleet of skeeter bass boat.
        (no plurality there.)
        What I see is more of the same crap that has been going on since 1948.
        Obama can only suggest where to spend.
        In fact the year prior to ISIL crawling from under their rock. Obama asked Boehner if he could take the varsity squad over to Syria. Boehner said…not without congressional approval and then he said no. With an N and O. Which is the mating call of ISIL.

        Obama, on tract to sign less executive orders than Bush and Reagan not combined. That lazy sob.

        Sorry, had some extra words laying around….

      • strayaway

        Reducing the unemployment rate from 23.6% to 18% after six years and with the cooperation of a Democratic Congress, devaluing the dollar by a third, and running up the debt was a pathetic result. By 1940, our factories were supplying Britain’s war effort.

        I wrote that Obama contributed to starting the war in Ukraine not that he “is responsible”. “Partly responsible” would have been a better interpretation than “is responsible” which insinuates solely responsible. There are credible sources saying that the CIA helped the local oligarchs organize to kick out the elected Ukrainian President. That provided Putin with an excuse and a weakened Ukraine to invade. US interventionism did not go well.

        I have to come to Forward Progressives to find anyone who supports Obama’s bombing of Libya even after it has become an Islamist playground.

        Arming Syrian rebels was a disaster. Obama’s moderate leaders fled to Turkey leaving all our weapons behind to empower IS.

        Kerry and Hillary share blame with Bush for the Iraq war because constitutionally only Congress can declare war, They chose to vote to give Bush their power to determine whether to war against Iraq. They violated their oath of office to defend the Constitution in doing so. They are on a par with Reichstag members who voted for the Enabling Act of 1933 giving away their powers to their executive branch. That’s what happens.

        Not liking the leaders of Ukraine, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, Serbia, or Syria is not reason, and certainly not a constitutionally supported reason to help overthrow them. Over and over, our interventionism has caused in increase in human misery, chaos, a lower standard of living, and even Islamization in these countries. When will the likes of Boehner and Obama ever learn?

        You are wrong about Obama only suggesting where to spend. Constitutionally, you are correct. However when he dropped bombs on Tripoli, provided weapons to Syrian rebels, or legislated changes in immigration law sticking it to local taxpayers, he incurred spending never approved by Congress.

        You miss the point that there is a qualitative difference in Obama’s executive orders. It’s one thing to approve promotions or requisition land for projects approved by Congress but bombing countries that have done nothing to us without congressional approval is a different matter.

      • Stephen Barlow

        WHEN DID THIS OVERIDE HAPPEN?

      • Stephen Barlow

        BRAVO!!!!

      • giankeys loves shemale porn

        not bad stray,,,,not bad!!!

      • Stephen Barlow

        Other than 54 votes to repeal health for 35miion people, what has he actually done? Degrade our national credit, shut down the government and whine?

    • Joseph B. Arrington

      That’s the entire issue, blame. You don’t have to do anything when you can convince people that someone else is to blame. “Jobs and poverty aren’t my problem, people don’t won’t to work and don’t have skills.”

      Most educated workforce of all time, longest average work week, least amount of time off of any generation, coupled with wage freezes, hiring freezes, offshoring, H1B hiring, and a stagnant economy, and exploitation of undocumented immigrants, yet we are STILL talking about tax cuts/breaks, keeping minimun wage stagnant, defunding all public services (including education, public assistance, and infrastructure) as shining examples of fiscal responsibility. As though, if we just keep spending less, it will all work out.

      Conservative politics = death panels. The only way that such policies work is when they result in death, when the so-called “problem children” are wiped out, when they no longer exist, when of large numbers of people, die.

      “Starve a cold, feed a fever,” goes the old addage, except starving is never the answer, only a body fed nutritional, well balanced diet is capable of functioning optimally. Staving doesn’t help people get jobs any more than it helps an economy.

      • Stephen Barlow

        I NEVER SAW IT THAT WAY, but damn if you aren’t 100% RIGHT!! I have been praying for the McCains an Grassly’s to retire or DIE!
        I nevermore realised a that Red Horde policy was so Genocidal! I mean unless you were a FETUS.-

      • RayandFannie Esparza

        They want to cut taxes,,,BUT what if you don’t have a job or earn too little to pay taxes, like probably almost half the country..A little help for the next 30-40 percent of the country…Ahhh But the top 10% might just do fine…Thank You very much..,.

    • Stephen Barlow

      Vote out loud!

  • Nemisis

    Boehner is a third degree idiot.

  • Fustercluck

    “If you wanted something you worked for it.”

    Funny the only time the Republicans concern themselves about jobs is when they want to score some points against Obama or the unemployed deploying their usual ‘entitlement’ meme. When it comes to anything that would seek to offset the massive loss of jobs due to the offshoring that’s occurred over the past several decades however – they’ve got nothing other than their unconditional support for more of the same.

    I’ve often wondered why this economic element never made it into the ‘sagebrush’ populism of the South and West – as though they haven’t also been adversely affected by it to an extent that’s certainly as important as the socially conservative issues this populism does proclaim to care about.

  • Cemetery Girl

    I have never been able to understand how those that are conservative and unemployed can parrot these kinds of sentiments. Do they think he means every unemployed person but them? I have also heard “I’m unemployed because the democrats drive jobs overseas.” I get that they feel that regulations, minimum wage, and such is the huge problem. Corporations are rewarded for taking jobs to places where they have no limits on how little they can pay, how many hours they can force employees to work, have little to no safety regulations in place for employees, if an employee is hurt or killed there is no compensation… Is this what we want? We want to go back to 12-16 hour shifts with one day off a week, making such a small amount it barely provides for your family and you may have to pull your child out of school, possibly before even puberty, so there is additional income to make ends meet?

  • Eg Kbbs

    You’d think that he’d know that to get unemployment (which is a form of insurance BTW – part of your compensation is that your employer pays the premium) you must first work and then loose that job through no fault of your own (if you don’t perform well, or are discharged for reason, you don’t get it). Then when you apply, your ex-employer can contest it.

    After all that, you’re only covered for a set period of time.

  • Pops

    The only lazy freeloaders living the extravagant lifestyle are a-holes like Boner and public servants of that ilk. With benefits no less! Talk about welfare. Geez.

  • Bea b

    If you read any of the comments my question is WHY OH WHY do these people keep getting ELECTED???? Some of them have been there 20 , 30, up to 50 years. Next time vote for someone else even if he is in the other party. Get these long term people (who owe favors to big businesses) out of there!!!