No idea. Maybe after that long pointlessly day trying to get his own party in that chamber to be reasonable and not salute thee before jumping off the Cliff, he got tired and forgot? Maybe he didn't want to incur the wrath of the Teabaggers since there was a durable resistence (for 2 months) among that circle to pass Sandy Relief? I don't know.

I do however believe he got screwed in the aftermath. Boehner already was a popular target of the right-wing blogs over "caving in," and then King went ballistic on national TV and Christie aired his own displeasure. A good avenue to vent rage against him. Notice that both men, both Republicans, personally blamed Boehner. (Christie blasted him especially for not returning his calls.) Both also praised Cantor by name. Who of course voted against the Cliff deal, and reportedly did his best to amend the Fiscal Cliff compromise package with spending cuts, which would've not been passed by the Senate and we would've gone off the Cliff.

This looks suspicious Why shouldn't Cantor be also blamed? Not planned or a conspiracy, just Boehner was a good convenient rag doll to beat up on at the moment. Thankfully Boehner kept his job, perhaps only because nobody else in his caucus wants it. So he's about as locally respected as the trashman?



The GOP will do their best to block Immigration reform, by demanding to do it piecemeal. (or worse, demand spending cuts with it. That's their predictable answer to everything anymore.) Quite frankly, and this might upset some local liberals, but that issue is much more important than gun control. Not just for political reward because the Democrats kept the Presidency thanks to the Latino turnout (and want to cultivate that voting bloc further), but also....it's time for immigration reform. Should've happened years ago, it's a real significant problem and we need to finally confront it. Common sense demands it.

Or put it another way, comprehensive Immigration reform will do more to solve that particular problem Democrats hope to solve than piecemeal gun control measures like say the assault weapons ban, which I do support.

(I'm just baffled Rubio, a man who could be President someday, wants nothing to do withat debate so far. Why not piss your mark on the issue while everybody else, including the POTUS, is worried about Cliffs? Own the issue like McCain did with campaign finance reform many years ago. Quit worrying about not offending Rush Limbaugh. You need more than his vote to win the White House.)



I think most, or at least most of the professionals within the party establishment understand that. Losing elections tend to magnify such gaps. The problem is even if they wanted to, THEY CAN'T. Why? Because the religious wingnuts are a core special interest group within their party coalition, in donations and especially in volunteer manpower for campaigns. Liberals like me speculated a good portion wouldn't come out and vote for a Mormon candidate, but we were wrong: Romney got the same Evangelical turnout as McCain.

If the GOP tell those groups that the war on gays is a lost cause, goodbye money and votes.

That's not to say all Republicans are either helpless stooges of the Religious Right, or their most partisan advocates. I think of Bob Gates and Ted Olsen what they've done in their own small ways. Gates as Secretary of Defense using Pentagon bureaucracy quietly muffled that stupid DADT policy, until Congress repealed it. Former Dubya Solicitor General Olsen lended his reputation and talent to sue California over Prop 8. (He co-plantiff was David Boies, his adversary counsel for Bush v. Gore.)

Not to mention the state/local Republican officials and activists who've done their part. Hell even voters. Half of the counties in Maryland that voted Romney also voted for the state SSM referendum. But unfortunately all them are exceptions so far.