After McCarthy Quit, Here’s The One Person Boehner Is Begging To Run For Speaker

Outgoing House Speaker John Boehner has reportedly been vocal regarding who he believes is best suited to replace him in the wake of front-runner Kevin McCarthy’s unexpected withdrawal from the race.

Despite conservative firebrand Trey Gowdy’s endorsement, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., is not attracting confidence from many right-wing Republicans who believe he is too much like the widely unpopular Boehner.

Many in the party, however, see the 2012 vice presidential candidate as the uniter a fractured GOP needs.

Should he decide to reluctantly throw his hat in the ring, Ryan will square off against the two confirmed candidates remaining in the race after McCarthy’s departure. 

One of the hopefuls, Florida Rep. Daniel Webster, has received the support of the conservative House Freedom Caucus and has expressed a desire to stay in the race.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, on the other hand, explained that he would concede his speaker bid should Ryan decide to run.

As it stands, his office released a statement Friday expressing thanks for the support he has received while making it clear that he “is still not running for Speaker.”

According to California Rep. Darrell Issa, Ryan will consider the proposal over the weekend and provide his answer Monday. Issa seems to believe that the Wisconsin congressman will heed the call to serve.

“Paul Ryan answered the call when he was called by Mitt Romney to consider being vice president,” he said, “and I believe he’s going home this weekend to soul search with his family about whether or not he can in fact accept this job — a job he doesn’t want, he isn’t seeking, but is seeking him.”

Would you support Paul Ryan as the next House speaker? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Watch: Here’s What McCarthy Said Immediately After Dropping Out Of Speaker Race

In comments made immediately after news broke that he intended to pass on a run for the Speaker’s chair, Representative Kevin McCarthy insisted that “it’s best that we have a new face” in leadership.

“I have been talking with a number of members we’ve been thinking about this throughout the week trying to see if we can get there,” McCarthy said, “I just think it’s best that we have a new face.”


McCarthy was immediately asked if his admittedly garbled comments about the Benghazi committee contributed to his inability to find a clear path to election as Speaker. In reply McCarthy joked, “Well that wasn’t helpful.”

“I could have said it much better,” he again admitted. “But this Benghazi committee was only committed for one purpose; to find the truth on behalf of the families of the four dead Americans. I should not be a distraction from that and that’s part of the decision as well.”

Another member of the media asked if McCarthy had decided not to run because of a letter sent by Congressman Jones reminding contenders for the Speaker’s chair not to run if they know they have embarrassing skeletons in their closet.

McCarthy scornfully responded, “No. No, come on.”

For those unfamiliar with this letter, on Wednesday Rep. Walter Jones, R-NC, sent out a letter to the GOP conference reminding colleagues that the Republican Party did not need any contenders for the Speaker’s chair that have any “misdeeds” in their past.

Jones hoped to avoid a replay of the messy abdication of Bob Livingston, R-LA, who in 1999 abruptly stepped aside from the race for Speaker because of a marital infidelity that had not yet made national news.

Finally, one of those whose name is being bandied as a possible replacement for McCarthy, Illinois Congressman Peter Roskam, said in a statement that he was shocked by McCarthy’s decision.

“Like every other House Republican, I was shocked at Leader McCarthy’s announcement,” Roskam said in a statement on Thursday. “I fully expected him to be the next Speaker of the House.‎ Kevin has spent years serving the Conference, and I look forward to his continued leadership. It’s clear we can’t move forward until we unite around a shared definition of success.”

Watch: Bill Clinton Was Asked Why Donald Trump Is Leading, And His Answer May Surprise You

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump is “the most interesting character out there,” former President Bill Clinton said Tuesday night in an appearance on The Late Show.

Clinton was asked by host Stephen Colbert to explain why Trump has been so successful.

“Because he’s a master brander,” Clinton responded. “And he’s the most interesting character out there.”

Clinton noted the difference between Trump and most of the other candidates seeking the Republican presidential nomination.

“He says something that overrides the ideological differences,” Clinton said. “If you look at the first debate, a lot of those guys were competing for who could be the most politically correct on the answers. Trump says, ‘OK, I’ve supported Democrats; I’ve supported Republicans. Yeah, I used to be friends with Bill Clinton – who cares?’”

Clinton gave his version of Trump’s basic message.

“‘I run things, and I build things. And you need somebody who’ll go in there and fix it,’” said Clinton, paraphrasing Trump. “‘And if they don’t let me fix it, I’ll just get them out of the way.’”

“There is a macho appeal to saying ‘I’m just sick of nothing happening. I make things happen. Vote for me,’” Clinton said.

Clinton also denied that he urged Trump to run for the White House.

“No. I get credit for doing a lot of things I didn’t do like that,” he said. “His daughter told my daughter that he had tried to call me, and I didn’t get the message. So I simply called him back. And I don’t know whether he’d ever intended to discuss this with me or not…I think by the time I got him back, he’d forgotten why he called me in the first place…Had a very pleasant conversation with him, and it wasn’t about running for office. So I missed the chance.”

h/t: Time

Watch: ‘The View’s’ Gay Co-Host Asks 2016 GOP Hopeful 1 Question About Marriage, Instantly Gets Shut Down

On Wednesday’s episode of The View, Rick Santorum was asked by Raven-Symoné “Why can we not have equal marriage rights?”

Santorum answered the question with apparent conviction. He said, “The greater purpose of marriage that society has always valued is to bring men and women together so when they have children, there’s a permanent bond by which those children can be raised by their natural mother and natural father.”

Current research supports Santorum’s statements in the following ways.

Children of homosexual parents, compared to children raised by their biological parents:

  • Are much more likely to have received welfare
  • Have lower educational attainment
  • Report less safety and security in their family of origin
  • Report more ongoing “negative impact” from their family of origin
  • Are more likely to suffer from depression
  • Have been arrested more often
  • If they are female, have had more sexual partners–both male and female

When Raven-Symoné added that same-sex couples can and do have children who are healthy, Santorum responded, “Historically, and I think sociologically, if you look at today, is in the best interest of that child to be raised by their natural mother and their natural father.”

Santorum’s statements reflect the statistical findings reported by the Family Research Council, which summarized a recent study published in the journal Social Science Research;

Children of lesbian mothers:

  • Are more likely to be currently cohabiting
  • Are almost 4 times more likely to be currently on public assistance
  • Are less likely to be currently employed full-time
  • Are more than 3 times more likely to be unemployed
  • Are nearly 4 times more likely to identify as something other than entirely heterosexual
  • Are 3 times as likely to have had an affair while married or cohabiting
  • Are an astonishing 10 times more likely to have been “touched sexually by a parent or other adult caregiver”
  • Are nearly 4 times as likely to have been “physically forced” to have sex against their will
  • Are more likely to have “attachment” problems related to the ability to depend on others
  • Use marijuana more frequently
  • Smoke more frequently
  • Watch TV for long periods more frequently
  • Have more often pled guilty to a non-minor offense

Raven-Symoné’s question may not seem relevant given the recent Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage, coupled with the reality that same-sex couples have been raising children for many years under the protection of the law to do so. But the question does demonstrate Santorum’s personal convictions, important to note in an election year.

Santorum is still in the race for president but only has 1 percent in the polls, yet he remains hopeful of a win in Iowa.

In light of the current research, do you believe, like Rick Santorum, that it’s healthier to be raised by one’s biological parents or homosexual parents?

Everyone Said Fiorina Lied About Planned P’hood At GOP Debate- Then THIS Video Was Just Released…

The Center for Bio-Ethical Reform has released the source video which became a point of controversy surrounding a claim made by Carly Fiorina at the second Republican debate.

As reported by Western Journalism, one of the most memorable moments of the debate at the Reagan Library was when Fiorina prosecuted Planned Parenthood for its alleged trafficking in aborted babies’ body parts.

“As regards Planned Parenthood, anyone who has watched this videotape, I dare Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama to watch these tapes. Watch a fully formed fetus on the table, its heart beating, its legs kicking, while someone says we have to keep it alive to harvest its brain,” she said. “This is about the character of our nation.” 

Fiorina’s highly charged and effective attack against Planned Parenthood elicited an almost immediate response from certain media outlets, included some Breitbart characterized as the “lying fact-checkers.” Many stated that the video Fiorina referenced does not exist. 

What the candidate does describe is the eyewitness testimony of a woman named Holly O’Donnell, who worked in Planned Parenthood facilities as a tissue procurement specialist. She recounts what Fiorina described. To depict the incident O’Donnell discussses, the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) used 10 seconds of footage of an aborted baby with its legs kicking and heart beating obtained from the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform (CBR). In the CMP video, the footage is clearly marked as being from CBR, so there was no attempt to deceive.

CBR released the full source video on Tuesday, titled “Carly Fiorina was right,” to prove the baby used to illustrate O’Donnell’s narration was aborted and was still showing the signs of life described.

The founder of CBR, Gregg Cunningham, told Fox News on Tuesday: “We have incontestably laid to rest the question of whether this is an authentic abortion because we show the abortion.”


h/t: Breitbart