Talk:John Boehner/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Name

Djramey saw fit to delete my entry here, so I thought I'd elaborate. Someone in the such a high position as House Majority Leader having a name that is a homonym of "boner" is highly relevent and encyclopedic.

If you can prove why this may be important and/or factual I'd be interested to hear the results. Elsewise, please keep such posts away from Wikipedia as they have no substance or reason. His name is not pronounced Bone-er as discussed below, but Bay-ner, thus making it not a Homonym.--Djramey 12:51, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Rep. Boehner Named Majority Leader

Updates have began to fill in. Keep up the good work and let's try to get this page updated and factual. I made a change in the text body about other candidates for the new position. (See: Rep. Blunt and Rep. Shadegg)--Djramey 19:12, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

FYI see the article U.S. House Republican Leader election, 2006 - Jord 19:21, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

pronounciation

Is it BONE-er or BAHN-er? Kingturtle 20:17, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I think it's BAY-ner. Not 100% though. 141.213.134.16 20:25, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, come on, who is this guy kidding? Haha. Anyway, everywhere on TV/radio I've heard the name it's been BAY-ner. 68.239.131.197 03:50, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to confirm that it's pronounced BAY-ner. —This user has left wikipedia 12:13 2006-02-03

"Baner" is correct because proper nouns can be pronounced in any way possible because they are not in the dictionary and should ideally not be subject to its rules. That's why we say (Michael) JORdan, not JorDAN.

Furthermore, we pronounce "reign" like "rain," not "REE-gn" so I see no reason why "boehn" cannot be pronounced as "bain."

• • • His name is pronounced Bay-ner, not bow-ner. He is my representative and I know how to pronounce his name. I have adjusted the page accordingly. *** —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.72.70.98 (talk) 17:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

The pronunciation appears to have been altered. Someone with proper phonetic knowledge needs to change it to convey that the last name of Rep. Boehner is pron. "BAY-nor" 128.211.237.25 11:03, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Religion

Curious, how important is it to list Boehner's religion in the box under his photo? Not saying it should be removed, but maybe replaced to a more appropriate spot on the page. What does everyone else think?--Djramey 12:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree wholeheartedly. Our constitution has a no religious test clause for a reason. Wolverineblue 02:18, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I think erroring on the side of providing more information, rather than less. I mean why wouldn't you list his religion?--M4bwav 02:22, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

It's somewhat untoward. You could argue that his race, ethnicity and sexual preference should be listed but people would ask what purpose it serves when describing a politician. That said, the politician infobox is pretty standard now and most list religion. I would probably change the "Roman Catholic" to just "Catholic" as that is the standard terminalogy but keep the link to the RC Church. Tbeatty 03:08, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Untoward how so, the history of voting in America has been along race, ethnic and religious lines, nothing could be more relevant. As far as, just mentioning Catholic, you got a lot of nerve insulting orthodox catholics like that, jk. Is there a single federal Orthodox catholic politican in America?--M4bwav 03:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

If we're going to remove a description of Boehner's religion from his infobox, the same effort ought to be made for all politicians, in the interests of consistency. The wiki profiles for Brownback, Pelosi, and Kennedy all list Roman Catholicism. If it's relevant for them, it's relevant for John Boehner. Of course, the reverse is also true.

This information couldn't be any more relevent, seeing as how people are deciding not to vote for Barrak Obama because it was rumored he was a Muslim... It really shouldn't matter, but to some people, unfortunately, it does.--Unionhawk (talk) 17:48, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Is it really necessary?

I thought it was a bit gratuitous to mention Abramoff several times in reference to Boehner. Isn't this just a partisan attack in the hopes that if you mention an accusation enough times, it will stick? I thought one reference was enough.

well, it probably will stick. but you're right, i removed it from the gang of seven reference Derex 19:56, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Request for expansion

Unlikely victory, his article can't compare with Delay's article or with the Democratic Minority Leader. It's time to expand and give Rep Boehner the article he deserves. —This user has left wikipedia 20:47 2006-02-02

Please be advised that the bio below probably fails to pass muster as "neutral", since it was written for Boehner's official house website. The bio as currently written in the main body of the article follows this official bio very closely.

Additionally, Mr. Baoehner made the claim on Meet the Press (1.25.09) that he had worked a dozen dirty jobs. Any evidence?

Wyoung515 (talk) 16:17, 25 January 2009 (UTC)wyoung515

Rented apartment

I think it is way too early to asy anything about the apartment. While it is news, it doesn't appear to be anything untoward or out of the ordinary. He pays market rate for a apartment he uses as a convenience. It suggests only that he is friends with John Milne. IT is not illegal or unethical to be friends with a lobbyist. SHow that he received some sort of illicit benefit or something nefarious before trying to insnuate a charge. I left the news. I took out the unjustified extrapolation. Tbeatty 20:45, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Boehner's agenda blueprint, "For a Majority that Matters," is perhaps noteworthy for its juvenility, if you care to read it: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/boehner_majoritythatmatters010906.pdf (e.g. “The most powerful limitations are those we put on ourselves.” --Me. Now.)

Obama's joke about him

Obama said he has a lot in common with Boehner because he is a man of color, although not any color that appears in the natural world. Could someone explain this? I'm sure it's an in-joke or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.209.32.86 (talk) 02:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

• Apparently: ".....has long been the butt of jokes for his apparent fake tan." - oh gaffaw 86.150.71.85 (talk) 16:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Why was this section removed from the article without comment here? I am going to restore it, until we have a more fleshed out conversation about the matter. VeritasRanch (talk) 22:40, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia should not be a place to post quips, jokes, or random quotes from the latest news cycle or events. The article of John Boehner should be much longer and detailed before this joke deserves a place on the page. I am tired of seeing articles updated every time the person/place/event is mentioned on The Daily Show or Colbert. I feel it really detracts from the quality of articles that Wikipedia is trying to achieve. The only place this joke (and all the other jokes from the WHCA dinner) would deserve mention is on a page specific to WHCA Dinner 2009 or even more specifically, Obama's Speech at the 2009 WHCA Dinner. In a year from now, do we want the article on Boehner to reflect that this was just as important as his minority leadership and congressional opposition? I highly doubt it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.138.33 (talk) 05:36, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

How Do You Pronounce his Last Name?

"Baner" is correct because proper nouns can be pronounced in any way possible because they are not in the dictionary and are not subject to its rules. That's why we say (Michael) JORdan, not JorDAN.

Furthermore, we pronounce "reign" like "rain," not "REI-gn" so I see no reason why "boehn" cannot be pronounced as "bain."

No idea who I'm talking to (I'd figure a signature bot would have helped me by now...) How exactly do you know for sure that it's pronounced much like the word "banner." Furthermore, names like Smith and Day are in the dictionary, and do comply with its rules, so why should a name like "Boehner" be any different?--Unionhawk (talk) 17:44, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

However it's pronounced, the current IPA link does not describe one of the glyphs used, and is thus pretty useless to most viewers of this article. What's a "ɚ"? I suggest it be switched back to "baner", or "banner", or whatever this Boehner says when he's on CNN, because using IPA is hella pedantic here. I bet 50% of people reading this article are doing so just to look up how you pronounce this dude's name without saying boner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.231.140.148 (talk) 03:03, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

"ɚ" is indeed in the linked IPA article, under "Reduced vowels". I'll put in a respelling pronunciation in a moment (let's see, BAY-nər?), but this is something that's been bugging me since the Bernhard Goetz thing, when I first heard an apparently–German-derived "oe" pronounced as ɛ. Is there a German accent that pronounces ø and ɶ as e and ɛ? I once met a lady who told me that the "oe" in her name was pronounced in German with a silent "o". (And every time I hear Wayne Newton singing "Danke Schön", I want to ask who Shane is….)—Dah31 (talk) 21:19, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Smoker

How is Boehner being a "very heavy smoker" notable? Mykll42 22:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not really notable---but then, neither is the space alloted to the discussion of the 2 women who made sexual assault allegations against Clinton in the main Wiki article on Bill Clinton. There's not a shred of evidence that these allegations are true (or that the women were anything other than pawns of the GOP slime machine). If Wiki is going to include every nutcase allegation against Clinton, then how about mentioning the controversy that Bush secured an abortion for his girlfriend in 1971 (which is mentioned nowhere in Wikipedia). Wikipedia has really gone downhill these days; it's nothing more than a mouthpiece of the GOP.

If someone is actually a "very heavy smoker", presumably they are almost constantly smoking, which is inherently notable in a biography of their life.--Gloriamarie 23:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

The policies Boehner support are often related to tobacco, health care, etc, so his addiction to nicotine is notable. And there are a number of verifiable links, one of which is on the page. --Skyemoor (talk) 19:30, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Quotes

The selected quotes (a) need to moved into Wikiquote and (b) are inherently POV since Wikipedians have themselves decided that these quotes represent Boehner. --ElKevbo 03:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

There is no POV involved--they accurately reflect Boehner's views. Users need to see them. Rjensen 03:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

How were those specific quotes, and no others, selected? --ElKevbo 03:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

all editors select material--otherwise this page would be 50 times longer. The two quotes deal with taxes (which is a bg deal for Boehner) and with his role as minority leader. The question is do they misrepresent him--does he really favor higher taxes and this is a misleading quote? I doubt it. Rjensen 03:27, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

So it's your point of view that those quotes represent him, correct? I'm still unclear on why those quotes are even necessary instead of working them into the prose. I'm also unclear on why they're here and not in Wikiquote. --ElKevbo 03:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

ElKevbo makes the good point they should be worked into the text, so I did that. (No, I was not the one tat selected the quotes, but I think they do reflect his positions.) Rjensen 03:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Works for me! Appreciate your patience and hard work! --ElKevbo 03:43, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Anyone have a newer photo?

Boehner is 60 this year and looks it in press photos. He doesn't look a day older than 50 in the article's photo. Anyone have a more recent photo they're allowed to use? --Vaughan Pratt (talk) 18:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I added one from a couple weeks ago. I'm sure there's a free press conference photo somewhere too. Wizardman 16:04, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

 Done Gage (talk) 07:20, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Tuskegee

Should the incident regarding his mispronounciation of "Tuskegee" be included in here?

His official bio

U.S. Representative John Boehner (OH-8) John Boehner (Bay-ner), elected to represent the Eighth Congressional District of Ohio for an eighth term in November 2004, continues to be a key leader in the fight for a smaller, more accountable federal government.

Born in Cincinnati in November 1949 as one of 12 brothers and sisters, John has lived in Southwest Ohio his entire life. He and his wife Debbie have been married for 32 years. They have two daughters – Lindsay and Tricia – and live in the northern Cincinnati suburb of West Chester. After graduating from Cincinnati’s Moeller High School, in 1968, John earned a bachelor’s degree in business from Xavier University in Cincinnati in 1977.

Upon his graduation, he accepted a position with Nucite Sales, a small sales business in the packaging and plastics industry, and eventually became president of the firm. While working in the private sector, John entered the political arena – first serving as Union Township trustee from 1982 to 1984 and then as a representative to the Ohio state legislature from 1984 to 1990.

In 1990, he was elected to represent Ohio’s Eighth Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives. During his tenure in the House, he has worked consistently to reform the federal government. His first two terms in the House were marked by an aggressive campaign to clean up Congress and make it more accountable to the American people. In fact, during his freshman year, Boehner and fellow members of the reform-minded "Gang of Seven" took on the House establishment and successfully closed the House Bank, uncovered "dine-and-dash" practices at the House Restaurant, and exposed drug sales and cozy cash-for-stamps deals at the House Post Office.

John was also active in education reform issues, despite serving in the minority at the time. In 1994, he passed legislation with strong bipartisan support allowing school districts to use their Title I funds for public school choice programs, under which parents could choose which public school their children would attend. Later, John was instrumental in crafting the Contract with America, the bold 100-day agenda for the 104th Congress that nationalized the 1994 elections. One of the Contract's cornerstones - the Congressional Accountability Act, requiring Congress to live under the same rules and regulations as the rest of the nation - bears the unmistakable imprint of his drive to reform the House.

The success of John's reform-minded agenda earned him election to the House Republican leadership after the Republican election victories in 1994. While in Congress, John has never lost sight of the need for greater fiscal responsibility in the federal government - a hallmark of his career as a small business owner. As House Republican Conference Chairman in the 104th and 105th Congress, John was a powerful voice in the fight to force Washington to stick to the strict spending limits in the Balanced Budget Act. And in September 1999, as Vice-Chairman of the House Administration Committee, John joined House Speaker Dennis Hastert to announce the first-ever "clean" independent audit of the House – a reform he first called for as a member of the Gang of Seven in 1992. "It was a proud day for the man who joined the committee in part because of his expertise in accountability and advocacy of government entities run by private-sector principles," Roll Call, a top Capitol Hill news source, observed.

In January 2001, John opened a new chapter in his congressional career when he was selected by House Republicans to chair the House Committee on Education and the Workforce. In accepting the post, John pledged to work with his committee colleagues – "Republican and Democrat alike – to make positive reforms for Americans from grade school to the golden years." As committee chair, he has helped deliver on President George W. Bush’s promise to reform America’s education system. In May 2001, the House passed John’s No Child Left Behind Act, a bill based on the President’s reform plan, with overwhelmingly bipartisan support. This success was highlighted by The Almanac of American Politics, which noted, “Putting together a bipartisan education package on a committee which has long been one of the most partisan in Congress…was a considerable achievement. Boehner now seems to be a more powerful member than ever.”

On January 8, 2002 President Bush culminated more than a year of intense legislative activity by signing the No Child Left Behind Act in Hamilton - a city in Ohio's Eighth District. And he did so in what he called one of the most important places in America: a public school. On the heels of this historic success, Boehner is now leading his committee as it tackles a wide variety of other issues including retirement security, higher education affordability and quality, special education reform, and expanded school choice.

Meanwhile, John continues to serve as Vice-Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, on which he is a consistent free market voice for Ohio’s farmers and ranchers. In his leadership positions on both of these key congressional committees, John is certain to have a major impact on the national legislative agenda during the 109th Congress - which is good news for the Ohio families he represents on Capitol Hill.

Estate Tax Quote Caption

I removed the remark in the quote caption that references to how the estate tax affects less than 2% of the wealthiest estates. It is unnecessary for establishing the context of the quote and inserts uneeded bias into this article. It is sufficient to remark that he is speaking of the estate tax and nothing more.

On the verge of tears?

The article says he was "on the verge of tears" when he spoke on May 25, 2007. Uh, actually he WAS crying. He was bawling his eyes out in that bizarre episode.

Financial Industry

Around two weeks ago in a meeting with fiancial industry executives, John Boehner said “Don’t let those little punk staffers take advantage of you, and stand up for themselves,” in reference to Congressional efforts to regulate the financial industry following the financial crisis. Given the hullabaloo around these comments, should they not be included in his "controversies" section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanzindahouz (talk • contribs) 14:26, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Recent call re:Pelosi

Sir: I was contacted this last week regarding Pelosi and a contribution of $75.00. First , I would like to repeat that she needs not be the "Head" of our government---Obama is a puppet. Second, we are fighting Leukemia and while I have excellant insurance, we have no money to spare. Sir, the GOP must redefine itself before we can move to remove anyone! Refer to Patrick of Texas for guidance--- we are in a huge mess and cannot start to correct the problems until we understand the problems! I applaud you in your efforts, and this time I intend to vote out every incumbent! Thank you-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.28.49.49 (talk) 00:55, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I think someone may have forgotten their meds today... 72.100.49.212 (talk) 00:59, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Elected Republican House Leader

Dude was elected the "Republican House leader" (speaker?) just now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.138.2.140 (talk) 20:28, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

german american

boehner (böhner?) sounds very german (even tho americans pronounce it a little wrong), does anyone know if mr. boehner is german-american? why isnt his heritage mentioned in the article, as it is usual on wikipedia? 84.155.120.130 (talk) 09:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

His family roorts are defenitely German. Just look at "Boehner's Interview With ABC World News with Diane Sawyer" [www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsZ7nU35QWk] from min 05:20. "Germans, we are savers not spenders ... " -- LG Mihewag (talk) 16:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

John Boehner's Top Lifetime Career Donors

{{editsemiprotected}}

This information comes from a Center for Public Integrity analysis of over $30 million in campaign cash, between his PAC and campaign committee. His close ties with lobbyists, however, have turned off even the occasional House Republican — then-Rep. Chris Shays of Connecticut opposed Boehner’s leadership bid in 2006, noting “The problem John faces is that he’s so close to K Street.”

When reached for a comment, Don Seymour, a spokesman for Boehner, said “Mr. Boehner has been blessed with generous supporters who share his vision of freedom, reform, and a smaller, more accountable government, and who know he’s a principled public servant who always does what’s right for his constituents and our country.”

Top Ten PAC's

1. AT&T Inc.tops the list of all-time givers among PACs, with at least $240,105 from its corporate PACs and the PACs for companies, such as Ameritech, BellSouth, and Cingular, that are now part of the telecommunications giant.

2. In second place, with $225,850 or more in donations, is the CME Group, which includes the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and Chicago Board of Trade.

3. Bank of America Corp. (BoA) ranks third among donors to Boehner with no less than $207,000, which includes the bank’s political action committee, along with PACs for now-merged former institutions like Bank of Boston, Countrywide, Fleet, Merrill Lynch, MBNA, NationsBank, and Shawmut.

4. Boehner’s fourth largest PAC, with at least $181,959, is the Altria Group Inc., parent of the Philip Morris family of tobacco companies.

5.In fifth place, with at least $165,750 in donations, is United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS), including contributions from the PAC for the now-merged Overnite Corp.

6. Sixth place on the list belongs to tobacco giant Reynolds American Inc., with a minimum of $158,500 donated to Boehner.

7. With at least $154,925 in donations, seventh place goes to JPMorgan Chase & Co., including the corporate PACs connected with the many former companies that now make up the global financial services giant such as Bank One, Chemical Bank, Providian, and Washington Mutual.

8. The eighth-most generous PAC was American Maritime Officers, the largest union of merchant marine officers, with at least $150,500 in contributions.

9. Ninth place belongs to shipping giant FedEx Corporation, with a minimum of $143,350 in donations to Boehner’s committees.

10. In tenth place with at least $142,390 in contributions: the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), a financial trade organization that represents banks, securities firms, and asset management companies nationwide.

Top Five Individual Donors

1. Boehner’s top individual donor, with at least $71,600 in contributions, is tobacco executive and lobbyist Bruce A. Gates. Their ties have been close for nearly two decades. In 2005, The Hill listed Gates as a member of Boehner’s “K Street Cabinet” of close lobbyist allies. Gates was part of Boehner’s Thursday Group. His wife, Joyce, worked for two years as Boehner’s chief of staff and, from 1995 to 2006, Bruce Gates served as treasurer of Boehner’s Freedom Project leadership PAC.

2. In second place, with at least $50,800 in contributions, is John J. Schiff Jr., the chairman — and former CEO — of Cincinnati Financial Corp., a top property casualty insurer group. In 1998, Cincinnati Financial praised the House for passing a financial modernization bill it called the most significant reform in 60 years; the firm also praised Boehner’s efforts on the bill as head of a Congressional task force created to draft the legislation.

3. Wayne M. Boich, the CEO of the Boich Cos., a Columbus, Ohio-based coal firm, is Boehner’s third-biggest contributor, with at least $48,100 in donations. In 2008, Boich purchased the massive Signal Peak coal mine near Billings, Montana with FirstEnergy Corp. Boehner has been a fervent supporter of “clean coal” efforts that would fund research to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions of coal-fired power plants.

4. With at least $47,900 in contributions, Michael Boland is Boehner’s fourth-most-generous individual donor. A one-time chief counsel to then-House Republican Whip Trent Lott, Boland also was a Verizon Communications Inc. senior vice president and a partner at a top lobbying firm before founding Dome Advisors LLC. Boland’s work for the telecommunications companies focused predominantly on backing pro-telecommunications trade policies, including the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR), which opened up wireless markets in those regions to American businesses. Boland was another of the lobbyists identified by The Hill in 2005 as part of Boehner’s “K Street Cabinet.”

5. In fifth place, with $45,500 is Robert B. Morgan, who served as chief executive officer of Cincinnati Financial Corp. from 1991 until his retirement in 1999. Morgan has distributed tens of thousands of dollars to Republican candidates and committees across the country. He also contributed to the Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America’s InsurPac. The industry trade group has opposed creating a public option for health insurance — as has Boehner — and expressed significant “concern” about a House bill to repeal antitrust exemptions for health insurers.

Numbers are from a Center for Public Integrity analysis of CQ Moneyline data by Josh Israel, Aaron Mehta, and Caitlin Ginley. Totals include individual and political committee contributions to John Boehner’s Congressional campaign committee and the Freedom Project PAC, from their inception through the end of 2009. PAC totals include all subsidiaries and companies now part of current companies after merger or acquisition.

• Center for Public Integrity - Who Bankrolls Congress? Series

Messiahisnotfunk (talk) 17:25, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. SpigotMap 19:39, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

This is excellent info. Why has it not been added? - Ira —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.50.229.55 (talk) 00:54, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Political Controversies 3.2:

This statement: 'he lied about not acting on the information, insisting his broker acted alone' is NOT supported by the cited article.

The segment should also include that the action is not prohibited by law, (it may be unethical but that is immaterial to this article) nor was Boehner alone in such an act (Dick Durbin attended the same meeting and sold stocks the following day as well.)

As written, this portion of the article is neutral. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.101.135.164 (talk) 17:54, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Also, use of the colloquial idiom 'cashed-out' borders on truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.120.203.25 (talk) 14:55, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I propose that the section should be removed; if a Controversies/Criticism section (which are for all intents and purposes the same thing) doesn't belong in the Nancy Pelosi entry, as one esteemed Wikipedia editor seems to think, why is it okay for Mr. Boehner? Is the Speaker any less controversial? The point was made that the existing separate "Criticism" sections should be removed and that criticisms should be contained within the larger body of these articles. Therefore, I see no reason why this one should remain unless Wikipedians want to have their cake and eat it too.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.53.176.235 (talk) 00:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Another sign Wikipedia has gone downhill. The sooner this zombie institution is dead, the better. We, the people, need a replacement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.157.9.235 (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Orange complexion

Can someone explain Boehner's orange complexion? Is this a natural tan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.118.85.6 (talk) 13:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

• • I think it isn't, at least according to [1]. That being said, maybe something regarding this should be mentioned in the article under his Personal Life section, only because it does seem to be a source of significant attention.76.4.58.200 (talk) 10:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
    • I think we should celebrate America's first Tangelo-American House Speaker.72.219.148.166 (talk) 05:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

His smoking contributes to his skin color. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elandtryan (talk • contribs) 13:11, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Congressional Record/Golf Picture

There was a picture of Boehner playing golf beside the section regarding his congressional record. I'm not sure why a picture of him playing golf would be in that section (or anywhere else in the entry for that matter). Seems like someone could find something more relevant or just stick with his official portrait. Roy Harmon (talk) 01:14, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I couldn't find pictures of him taking a bribe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.29.22.217 (talk) 02:13, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Sick burn!!! Alexif (talk) 01:24, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

27!

There are 27 external links. Seriously, what could all of these links add to the article? Most of them should be dropped per WP:EL Arzel (talk) 23:12, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

recent claims

Dont know if we want to add a section about the affair allegations that are floating around the net. The charges are that he is seeing Lisbeth Lyons who is a lobbyist/VP for the Printing Industries of America. We can wait until a major news source picks it up. But I just wanted to let you know because people will be editing this page to include it, im sure. Cheers. --24.210.222.2 (talk) 23:52, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

No, its worthless gossip and partisan attack type content, we are protecting Boehner keep it out. Off2riorob (talk) 00:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Neither Rep. Boehner nor Ms. Lyons has denied the allegations of an affair. He has put himself in the spotlight and does not need protection from the heat any more than any other politician. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.235.65.47 (talk) 22:28, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

The lamestream press has dropped this already. http://www.wisepolitics.com/lisbeth-lyons-john-boehner-scandal-not-real-1935.html Hcobb (talk) 23:14, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Apt, credible criticism

Please use this piece from the NYT as the basis of a criticism section for in the Boehner article: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/opinion/05herbert.html?_r=1

e.g. Mr. Boehner “maintains especially tight ties with a circle of lobbyists and former aides representing some of the nation’s biggest businesses, including Goldman Sachs, Google, Citigroup, R.J. Reynolds, MillerCoors and UPS. They have contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to his campaigns, provided him with rides on their corporate jets, socialized with him at luxury golf resorts and waterfront bashes and are now leading fund-raising efforts for his Boehner for Speaker campaign, which is soliciting checks of up to $37,800 each, the maximum allowed.”

"When House Democrats were preparing for the first floor vote on financial regulatory reform, Mr. Boehner and other Republican leaders summoned more than 100 industry lobbyists and conservative activists to a private strategy session."

In July 2010 Mr. Boehner 'called for a moratorium on new federal [financial reform] regulations, saying it would be “a wonderful signal to the private sector that they’re going to have some breathing room.”' Ancient Infant (talk) 17:34, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

• comment - It is a piece by Bob Herbert without his opinions and claims, neutral. Off2riorob (talk) 17:40, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I removed a questionable source for this line: "However, the Center for Responsive Politics reports that Boehner has received significantly less lobbyist donations than opposition politicians such as Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer." I think the information is relevant, but HotAir's blog is simply not reliable. I recommend going straight to the Center for Responsive Politics if you want to cite this.

However, I really recommend removing or reworking this line. Listing specific "opposition politicians" isn't necessary. Also this line doesn't really address the content of the NYT's piece, which focuses on his _associations_ with lobbyists, not campaign contributions. Finally, total campaign contributions from corporations to Mr. Boehner's campaigns greatly exceeds those of the listed politicians based on the Center for Responsive Politics (http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/index.php). Overall, this seems like an extremely agenda driven response to the Times piece. IMO, in the interest of keeping this article scholarly, the entire second half of the controversies section could go. Taft (talk) 17:02, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Speaker of the House

The article presents as fact that John Boehner is the incoming speaker of the house. This is a assumption, albeit a good one, that may or may not be the way things turn out. It should be removed until the leadership election. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.253.96.236 (talk) 08:35, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Both times that the position is mentioned it uses the language 'presumed' and 'speculated' which is very similar language to what the national media and the sources state. I don't see any harm in stating what is generally accepted as true and addresses the current international media discussions that would prompt people to look up the person who is expected to become one of the most powerful people in the US government at this point in time. Veriss (talk) 15:48, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

IIRC, Nancy Pelosi was listed as "Speaker-Presumptive" prior to taking office in 2007; it is the proper title (the officeholder is presumed to be the next speaker) until confirmed by the caucus. Once confirmed by the caucus, the officeholder's title becomes "Speaker-Designate," as he has been designated by caucus, but not elected. Mrfeek (talk) 17:02, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I present that his actual title should be "Speaker-Designate", since the | official GOP website refers to him as such after they voted today. Davaplayboi 03:18, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Nancy Pelosi's wiki entry has her listed as Speaker-elect in a caption. Either that needs to be changed, or the same title should be attributed to Boehner. Otherwise we lose NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.161.195 (talk) 21:24, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Jandelichte, 4 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} typo: change "Cinncinati" into "Cincinnati" Jandelichte (talk) 11:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done corrected both instances. Veriss (talk)

Request delisted. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:57, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Oops, forgot to delist it, thanks Salvio. Cheers, Veriss (talk) 18:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Boehner a bartender?

Boehner tended his family's bar for several years as a teenager, and mentioned that extensively in his victory speech Tuesday, so I added the category Category:Bartenders. Another editor undid me (and left a test warning and welcome in violation of Don't Template the Regulars), but I believe it belongs, so I put it back. Thoughts? Purplebackpack89 04:12, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

By the way, proof of his bar experience can be found in reference 4 of the article Purplebackpack89 04:56, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Cite the year. Veriss (talk) 05:26, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Why? There's no need to. You're setting too high a bar for a category; merely proving he was at one time is sufficient Purplebackpack89 05:34, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:BLP sweetie. Veriss (talk) 05:40, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I hate all politicians equally almost as much as I despise editors who pretend to be NPOV but who really are not. If you can't cite it, you walk. Please cite the year or let it go gracefully. Veriss (talk) 05:47, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm not seeing where I need to cite a year. If I can reference that he was a bartender at some point, the year is not necessary. Can you point to any policy to the contrary? Purplebackpack89 07:00, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Which reference was it? #4 doesn't contain anything about bartenders. If I'm reading this correctly, there's no mention of him being a bartender in the article, just the existence of the category. I'm not sure how the bartender category is normally used, but I'm under the impression that he's a bartender, not a politician. Do you believe it would be more appropriate to add the information about once working as a bartender to his history? Some sources: Vanity Fair (I know..) & FT. Netalarm^talk 07:48, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

It's on page 2, Net. I take it your argument is more about appropriateness, and less about BLP? Purplebackpack89 08:01, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I delivered pizzas in college and I heard that Bush 41 did too! What value does including that he tended bar while college funds were scarce add to the discussion? Am I known for being a pizza boy now? Is he known for being a bartender now? Do you want to dredge up that Hillary was great on skates and made awesome tips at drive-thrus too? Veriss (talk) 08:38, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Connections to lobbyists

There was an uncited statement in there about how he got less lobby money than Pelosi, Schumer, and Reid. With regards to Pelosi, it was demonstrably false and I've added a citation to show that. With regards to Schumer and Reid it is true, but Senate campaigns are more expensive than House campaigns. If you're going to cite Reid's figures then, in balance, you have to cite McConnell's figures, which are roughly the same as Reid's. Then you're at the point where you're comparing apples to oranges, so what's the point? And I guess it would be oranges to apples considering Boehner's skin color ... just kidding :) ... but in all seriousness, trying to compare his fundraising to that of Senate candidates isn't particularly pertinent. If someone wants to go ahead and add or change, fine, but maybe you could post a rationale as to why it's pertinent? Alexif (talk) 01:21, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Don Gonyea of NPR summarizes Boehner

How about having the following quote set off on a grey background against the rest of the Political Positions section:

Boehner is an old-fashioned, small-government, country-club, cocktail-drinking, cigarette-smoking Republican. You know, there is nothing terribly radical about the guy except the fact that many of the things the president wants to do really go against the grain of his deeply seated Republican beliefs in small government. He’s very much a foe of earmarks, always has been. You know, he’s basically somebody who follows a kind of a corporate line. Much of what he does reflects the opinions and the preferences of the business community

--Brian Dell (talk) 19:05, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Why? How is his opinion worthy of such a prominent quote? Arzel (talk) 22:11, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Speakership of the House of Representatives

The FULL House of Representatives chooses the Speaker (according to Article 1 of the Constitituion). In 'January 2011', the Republicans will have their candidate (likely Boehner) & the Democrats will have their candidate. Since the Republican will have a majority? they'll likely vote for their own candidate. These events don't occur until JANUARY 2011. Please let's not put Boehner as Speaker-elect. GoodDay (talk) 14:04, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that changed a while ago. The majority picks, the vote is only ceremonial--150.212.38.76 (talk) 18:15, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

The Democrats are still the majority until January 2011. Besides, though highly unlikely, a bunch of Republicans in January 2011, may decide to support the Democratic candidate. Or, Boehner could be dead by then. GoodDay (talk) 21:26, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Thats true, so thats why he isn't "Speaker-elect" he is the "Speaker-designate". http://gopleader.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=215305 Davaplayboi 05:41, 20 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davaplayboi (talk • contribs)

A better descriptive would be Republican nominee for Speaker. GoodDay (talk) 12:18, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you in essence, but to remain factually correct, because a) the Republicans have a majority in the House, he is by all statistical odds, the Speaker-designate. That is the title he has been bestowed him by the powers that be the Republican Conference Committee. Davaplayboi 16:34, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Nancy Pelosi's entry has two instances referring to her as Speaker-elect. Either that should be changed or the same title should be applied to Boehner. Otherwise, we lose the NPOV that wikipedia supposedly wants to maintain for all entries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.161.195 (talk) 17:14, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Majority Leader

I was wondering, when will the Republicans elect the Majority Leader of the House (since Pelosi was already elected by the Democrats November 17th), and is it likely to be Boehner as well, or someone else? Seeing as how he would resign the position if he is elected Speaker of the House, it seems likely that Eric Cantor will be the new Majority leader, but I'd like to know if there have been any reports about who the Republicans will elect. - BlagoCorzine2016 (talk) 22:34, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Whomever the Republicans elect, he/she will be Republican House Leader. Since the Republicans will have a majority in the House of the 112th Congress, their leader will be known as the Majority leader. GoodDay (talk) 22:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I understand this, but when will the Republicans choose who their new leader is? Boehner is most likely not going to be since he'll end up being Speaker of the House, so it really leaves Eric Cantor as the closest candidate (though I won't add this or the Speaker part to the article seeing as how they're speculations). - BlagoCorzine2016 (talk) 22:43, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure when the House GOP will choose, but it seems Cantor is the guy. GoodDay (talk) 23:12, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

They have already elected the leaders, and he is the Speaker-Designate. http://gopleader.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=215305 Davaplayboi 05:39, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

No he aint'. He's the House GOP's nominee for Speaker. GoodDay (talk) 16:33, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Nancy Pelosi's entry has two instances referring to her as Speaker-elect. Either that should be changed or the same title should be applied to Boehner. Otherwise, we lose the NPOV that wikipedia supposedly wants to maintain for all entries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.161.195 (talk) 17:15, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Clarify, where at? GoodDay (talk) 17:18, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Infobox squabble

There seems to be a spat of fighting here. Please discuss what each of you are proposing 'here'. GoodDay (talk) 21:28, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

My reasoning behind keeping the Speakership hidden here is because it precludes people who don't read notes from putting him in as Speaker anyway but placates them because it can very easily be put in if and when he is elected early January. The other edits I've made not concerning the Speakership in the infobox are for standardization and clarification purposes. Therequiembellishere (talk) 22:33, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm fine with that. GoodDay (talk) 22:53, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Edits to the Office Infoboxes

Please stop changing the office infoboxes from the way they currently are. People reading this article need to know that it is the United States House of Representatives that he is the leader of, etc. You can't just say he is the Speaker of the House of Representatives or the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, because that could refer to any house of Representatives.

Also, do not remove the additional info needed. For example, people should know Dennis Hastert was the Speaker during John Boehner's time as Majority Leader. But people keep removing it. Please stop. This also applying to Nancy Pelosi's article, when it comes time to add it the Speaker infobox in January, we need to list the majority leaders too. People have been removing the majority leader part of the Speaker infobox in Nancy Pelosi's infobox and I am afraid they will do the same for John Boehner when it comes time to add in his Speaker infobox.

Finally, if you insist on reverting it back to the way it was. You need to Revert it for every single person that was ever in House Leadership to keep consistant. Otherwise, it should be left alone. I changed it back and please leave it like that. Thank you. --Politics2012 (talk) 14:32, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

This should've been placed at the bottom. Also, you should be answering your messages at 'your' talkpage (that's why there's always a gold colored bar at the top of your screen). Futhermore, you've breached 3RR & are in danger of getting blocked. GoodDay (talk) 01:49, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

You don't seem to be able to grasp the concept of adding the speaker to the infobox and instead decide to revert the page back to its outdated, cruft-filled form. And that's out of line. Even so, it's very arguable that people have to know who the Speaker was during a leader's term, because the roles are unrelated. Even more redundant is the idea that the Speaker should have who the Majority Leader is because the former is above the latter is a way that isn't a deputy/leader or a appointee/leader relationship. As explained, Majority and Minority Leader are titles invented to clarify their positions to the public and are officially the leader of their respective party in the lower house of government. The Speaker is the leader of the entire house and is unrelated to the party leaders. Technically, we could just make one, continuous office for "Leader of the Republican/Democratic Party in the House of Representatives" and leave Majority/Minority Leader out of it.

Furthermore, a fairly large number of major officials in other countries don't feel the need to spell out for its articles' readers that, for example, a British politician, is part of the British parliament or a Cabinet member of the British government. It's redundant and, in my opinion, insulting to the reader because it insinuates that they won't already realize this. In colloquial terms, Pelosi is referred to in the media as "Speaker of the House of Representatives" and not "Speaker of the United States House of Representatives".

Now stop acting like you WP:OWN the page and treating other editors like they know less than you and remember to add new topics to the bottom of the page. Therequiembellishere (talk) 02:18, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Actually, it has to be Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, like all her predecessors. Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia. Also, within the USA, many of the states have their own House of Representatives. GoodDay (talk) 02:23, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

John Bercow isn't listed as Speaker of the British House of Commons. It's common sense where she is the Speaker of and if her predecessors continue to state it then they can also be changed. Therequiembellishere (talk) 02:27, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

We gotta be consistant with Pelosi & Boehners predecessor article's infoboxes. GoodDay (talk) 02:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Also, see Peter Milliken, Speaker of the Canadian House of Commons, for an example on another country's legislative leaders. GoodDay (talk) 02:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Also notice that Harry Reid & Mitch McConnell go by Majority leader of the United States Senate & Minority leader of the United States Senate, as do their predecessors. GoodDay (talk) 02:49, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Then there's Harry Jenkins, Speaker of the Australian House of Representatives & his predecessors. GoodDay (talk) 02:51, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

You got my point GoodDay. Thank you for correcting that. My Apology's for violating 3RR, but Therequiembellishere keep reverting it. I see you also started reverting all the other Speaker's pages to match Pelosi's. So thank you. As for Therequiembellishere, please be nice. You were extremely rude to me when I was mostly right all along. Good Day to both of you! --Politics2012 (talk) 18:09, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

A little tip, converse with others at User talk:Politics2012 more often, it helps with collaboration. GoodDay (talk) 03:44, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Although I still disagree, I'll concede the country name in the infobox so long as the rest of my arguments stand. Therequiembellishere (talk) 03:57, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

We shouldn't have majority leader under the Speaker section of the infobox, though. GoodDay (talk) 04:01, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

True. As I've explained. Therequiembellishere (talk) 04:04, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

So, ya both are content with the way things currently are at this article & the Pelosi article? GoodDay (talk) 04:08, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

As content as can be. Therequiembellishere (talk) 04:10, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I second that. --Politics2012 (talk) 19:19, 23 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.62.185 (talk)

Jolly good show. GoodDay (talk) 04:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Links to his bio

I changed one link to his bio being used as a citation to "citation needed". The reason for this is as follows,

The reliability of a source depends on context. Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made and is the best such source for that context. In general, the more people engaged in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and scrutinizing the writing, the more reliable the publication. Sources should directly support the information as it is presented in an article, and should be appropriate to the claims made. If a topic has no reliable sources, Wikipedia should not have an article on it.

That's from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:RS

Technically "dine and dash" in that sentence should be changed to a page reflecting a specific incidence of this happening, rather than the main page explaining what "dine and dash" means. The passage I'm reffering to is a direct or slightly paraphrased lift from Boehner's bio page,

John’s first two terms in the U.S. House were marked by an aggressive campaign to clean up Congress and make it more accountable to the American people. During his freshman year, Boehner and fellow members of the reform-minded “Gang of Seven" took on the House establishment and successfully closed the House Bank, uncovered "dine-and-dash" practices at the House Restaurant, and exposed drug sales and cozy cash-for-stamps deals at the House Post Office. John also adopted a personal “no earmarks” policy upon taking office in 1991, a no-pork policy he maintains to this day.

This borders on self-promotion, but can be saved merely by giving specific examples with details included in reliable sources as to exactly what is meant by "cash-for-stamps" and "dine-and-dash", as well as any names, dates, and other details that can be released to the public domain. Going the extra mile and making individual pages for these incidents would be very much appreciated, as these are potentially good examples of the applied ethics of Congressional representatives, which I'm sure Boehner himself would agree have a much broader and more interesting scope than Boehner himself. He strikes me as the kind of person who places his ideals above himself, if the aim of the previous passage is to be accepted at face value.

This isn't important just from an encyclopedic point of view. If the aim of the passage was to paint Boehner in a good light, that aim will fall through the minute the kind of people that actually read WikiPedia click citation links and are disappointed to see the exact same sentence they were staring at a moment ago on someone's personal bio page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.23.45.119 (talk) 16:51, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Boehner's Picture

The picture he currently has is clearly shopped. The actual one can be found here. http://gopleader.gov/UploadedFiles/JAB-official.jpg Pictures like this harm Wikipedia's credibility and should be taken care of. Elandtryan (talk) 13:42, 16 December 2010 (UTC)rocke

"Shopped" how? I'm not seeing a problem when comparing the two images. Could you be more specific? --Onorem♠Dil 13:29, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

When I look at both pictures size by side the one on Wikipedia appears to exaggerate his appearance if only ever so slightly. Maybe its just me, but someone on his picture's talk page mentioned it too so I don't think it is. Elandtryan (talk) 13:42, 16 December 2010 (UTC)rocke

I still don't see a difference. If you're sure that there is, you could always upload a new version over the current one at commons. --Onorem♠Dil 13:49, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Nix the waterworks, hunh?

What's up with that? It's certainly notable, having occurred many times. It's the subject of an op ed piece in Wednesdays NYT for example as well as having been mentioned in the archived threads. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 10:47, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Cap and Trade Original Research

The Cap and Trade linking is Original Research and synthesis of material. It was worded to imply that Boehner is a hypocrite. The Cap and Trade that was being pushed through the 2008 congress was nothing like the previous pollution control of Regan and Bush Sr. The Bill pushed by McCain and Liberman was not a republican bill, but a bi-partisan bill, and not all that similar either. This is all cleverly hid by the word "Initiatives" which is what Politicfact is using for it's "truthometer". But this is very misleading for this article, and to try and link Boehner's stance with sources that do not mention him at all are clearly OR and Synth. Arzel (talk) 15:01, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Help update 112th Congress

{{Edit semi-protected}} With the departure of many more senior members, House seniority, his order of precedence box should be updated to years = 55th; his preceeded by and succeeded by remain unchanged. Thanks in advance. 75.204.42.109 (talk) 17:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

• Done Alpha Quadrant ^talk 17:30, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

political views over time

Is it worth mentioning that his political views went from fairly liberal to extremely conservative as he became more successful in his career (and therefore more wealthy)? There are probably a number of reputable citations for this tidbit and it seems at least equally worthwhile as many of the other pieces of trivia in the "Early life, education and career" section. The section generally seems set on describing him as a man of modest circumstances who catches the american dream, becoming a self-made rich guy. Is it not worth noting that his political views tracked closely with that progression? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.244.218 (talk) 04:11, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Where does the pronunciation of his name, which is neither German nor English, come from? 85.179.139.115 (talk) 20:17, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Gang of Seven?

The gang of seven section is really problematic--this whole "took on the establishment, Repubs and Dems alike" business is a now-tired, standard piece of Republican marketing. Why is it being used to frame Boehner's activities here in a separate section? - Ira —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.50.229.55 (talk) 00:58, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

• Update: After a week without any response, I went ahead and deleted the section, which was propagandistic rather than useful information. To put this decision in perspective, please note that a Google search turned up just three Boehner-related hits for "Gang of Seven" within the first 30 hits. Of those three, only one was a legitimate news source (a half-critical, half-approving NYT article); one was a private website, and another was a marketing piece. Searching Google Scholar, there were no Boehner-related hits in the top 50. Obviously, this doesn't mean that the section has no right to exist, but until somebody puts together a reasonable and balanced--and sourced--write-up, it's really not encyclopedia material. - Ira —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.50.229.55 (talk) 08:14, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

He is also the leading face of Republican opposition to President Barack Obama.

Is this really necessary in the lead? Not only is it not sourced, but is somewhat bias and/or misleading. How is he the leading face against Obama? By nature, him being the House Speaker of the party that is in opposition to his, puts the two at natural odds, but that doesn't make him the face of an anti-Obama movement. In fact, the two will have to work together if legislation is expected to be passed. Anyone agree or disagree with removing the sentence. --Ted87 (talk) 03:26, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. It would be more accurate to say that in the lead up to the mid-term elections, the Obama administration portrayed Boehner as the face of the Republican party.--Brian Dell (talk) 12:30, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Name

His name is pronounced "boner". I don't care what he says or how much he tries to make it sound fancy, it's still "boner". 75.253.93.60 (talk) 01:48, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, It's definitely "BOH-ner" How in the hell do you get "BAY" out of "Boeh" That breaks all the rules of linguistics. The pronunciation is obviously contrived to avoid embarrassment. There's no reason he should feel ashamed though, Its a very fitting nickname for his behaviour. He should wear it with pride. 64.222.124.171 (talk) 15:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

His name really is accurately pronounced "Bay-ner", and the reason is straightforward, but you have to know something about phonetics and German dialectology to understand why. In standard German, the name is spelled either "Boehner" or "Böhner", and the umlauted vowel refers to a variant of the sound "ay" but with the rounding of lips (this is the same sound as "eu" in French "Chaufeur"). In certain mostly eastern German dialects however, this "ö" sound systematically becomes "eh" in all words, including proper names, so that words that are written with "ö" rhyme with words written with "eh" (which in German sounds like the vowel in English "say"). This pronunciation almost became a standard one; Goethe and Schiller both wrote poems where the rhyme only makes sense if "ö" and "eh" refer to the same sound. Because the man we're talking about pronounces it that way but spells it as if it were German, we can be fairly certain that his family came specifically from one of those regions of Germany which lost the "ö" sound entirely, and that this was preserved when his family immigrated to America. Probably this means his family was also literate, since if they weren't he probably wouldn't use the strange spelling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.198.21.103 (talk) 23:49, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I've known people named 'Schloegel" (SHLAY-gull) and "Ploegh" (PLAYGH). Also, the creator of the Simpsons is Matt "Groening" (GRAY-ning). Your own ignorance belies the prevalence of this transliteration. Pronouncing his name as 'boner' would basically be the same as disparaging someone whose last name is 'Cox' or 'Hicks:' you're making an ad hominem atack, whick really only makes you look ignorant. Dhicks3 (talk) 07:48, 26 December 2010 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhicks3 (talk • contribs) 07:43, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Seems strikingly familiar to this fictional character 84.93.175.100 (talk) 19:35, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

If that's the pronunciation Boehner uses, [ˈbeɪnɚ] is the correct pronunciation of his name. It's as easy as that. I'm with the preface to the BBC Pronouncing Dictionary of British Names on this one: using a pronunciation other than the one used by the relevant person(s) themselves is just plain rude. And if you think he's a dick (hee hee) and should be pronounced (pronounced /ˈboʊnər/ because of that ... well if you think that's grown-up reasoning, I don't see what you're doing working on an encyclopedia. And Re: "all the rules of linguistics": [ˈbeɪnɚ] is not that far from the original German pronunciation of Boehner ([ˈbønɑ̯]) in that both [eɪ] and [ø] are front vowel sounds (the first being a diphthong, the second being an Umlaut). As a native speaker of German, I can absolutely understand how a non-German speaker might end up with something like Bay-ner 84.58.234.206 (talk) 12:07, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Stick it smart guy. The guy's name is pronounced boner and he is a boner. ---- signed by Jeremiah Small Weiner.

Also, for your consideration: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_names_in_English_with_counterintuitive_pronunciations 84.58.234.206 (talk) 12:22, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

The name is German meaning that at one point it was either Boëhner or Böhner both of which would be pronounced Bay-ner —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.212.38.76 (talk) 18:20, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

"Bohner" or "Bohner" would indeed be pronounced like "Boner." But his name is "Boehner." "Boehner" or "Böhner" would be pronounced closer to "BAY-ner" and not "BOH-ner." Midtempo-abg (talk) 22:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

This is all just speculation. Without a reliable source, this information does not belong in the article.--RadioFan (talk) 14:31, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

I attempted to insert a sentence briefly clarifying his name pronunciation, explaining that Boehner pronounces it "bayner". To support this I gave a link to his Biography at house.gov which starts "John Boehner (bay-ner) ...". So can you explain why my edit was reverted with the comment "Not in source" ? Can you comment please, Arzel? I think the clarification of his name pronunciation is useful, certainly necessary to those who have only read his name and not heard it on tv, and the pronunciation is definitely supported by the authoritative reference! Care to rethink your revert? Thrapper (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

You stated in the edit that he pronounces his name "Bay-ner" which is different from the normal German pronuciation. That source made no such mention that there is some normal pronuciation, no mention of German at all. It is already in the lead regarding the correct pronuciation, so I don't see the need to repeat this and make a statement that doesn't seem to be backed up by the source you used. Arzel (talk) 14:47, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Partial correction. I see the original pronuciation was removed from the lead. Also the original pronuciation has some WP:OR in it, so I restored the pronuciation and removed the OR. Arzel (talk) 14:59, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

OK, cool. Thrapper (talk) 15:06, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Do we actually know where in Germany his family originates from? As mentioned above, the pronounciation would be different depending in the dialect spoken in the specific region. Also, are we sure that the "oe" in Boehner originally was the Umlaut "ö" (which is usually spelled "oe" if Umlauts are unavailable), or is "Boehner" the original spelling? In that case, the "e" could also serve to stress the vowel, which is still common in German with the vowel "i," and used to be common in regions in northern Germany (see city names like "Soest" or "Coesfeld," where the "e" stresses the vowel in the way and "h" would do in Modern German). In that case, the German pronounciation would be / would have been "Bohner," with a long vowel. Let's just say that "bay-ner" is in no way what we would say in Germany, but I guess that's besides the point. "bay-ner" does sound artifical to me, but then again quite a few names of German or Jewish origin do nowadays(just think of all the -steins, which Americans pronounce "st_ee_n" when it used to be "steyn," as in the German word for "stone" or "ruby"). 132.230.124.140 (talk) 09:36, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

National Enquirer stuff

Why are these allegations of affair(s) included when no major source has carried them? If the NY Times is working on a story then Wikipedia picks it up when the story is published. Generally accepted practice for BLPs is that salacious tabloid material is excluded until published by a serious source. The section earlier just said that he had a "taste for parties and fine wines" sourced to the New York Times. This is the responsible way to address allegations of heavy drinking, for example; it acknowledges that he enjoys a cocktail while not saying something pejorative, and always sourcing to a reliable, respected source. If Boehner is indeed a womanizer then a paper like the NYT would at least hint at that and the hinting language could be quoted and properly cited. In the mean time this stuff is just a smear.--Brian Dell (talk) 12:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree and have removed that paragraph. The NE report is a second-hand report of what they say is being investigated by the NYT. Even if that's true, it doesn't mean the underlying allegation is true - the Times might find there's inadequate evidence, etc. While the NE has occasionally scooped other news sources with important stories regarding the private lives of politicians, they are not generally considered a reliable or sufficient source for such material. When non-gossip papers report that there have been actual affairs, then we can add something.   Will Beback  talk  21:04, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

My point is that other sources have covered this and they've dropped it a while back. This is not new or solid. http://www.wisepolitics.com/lisbeth-lyons-john-boehner-scandal-not-real-1935.html Hcobb (talk) 23:14, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Political party

The current entry in the box on the right side of the page says 'Nazi.' This kind of vandalism does us non-Republicans no favors. Somebody please fix it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frazierdp (talk • contribs) 00:39, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Already done.   Will Beback  talk  00:43, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

will john boehner be the 45 POTUS is obama is found ineligible?

I know wiki does not allow wp:crystal but correct me if i am wrong;if obama is found and impeached and convicted of having to lied about his birthplace,wouldn't VP also be nullified? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.212.28.227 (talk) 12:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a source for this violation of BLP and what possible crime would Biden be abiding? Hcobb (talk)

This discussion is misplaced, but I don't see that it's a blatant BLP violation. Bringing it up as general question at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous#US presidential line of succession. The answer might be in United States presidential line of succession...but I don't feel like reading through it at the moment. --Onorem♠Dil 18:10, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Military Spending listed under Political Positions

It reads only "Boehner has called on the President to justify spending for military operations against terrorists.[29]"

The sentence is vague and uninformative. Does not state when he declared the position nor names the president. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.62.102.221 (talk) 22:10, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Broken Reference to Strong Lobbyists Links of Boehner

Since I am not allowed to edit this page, could one of you with edit rights fix the links to the New York Times articles reporting Boehner's connections to Lobbyists? the link is http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/12/us/politics/12boehner.html In my opinion, this is a rather important piece of information and should be linked properly so that everybody can check out the source. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.130.251.118 (talk) 12:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

"Note" section regarding Pronunciation of "Boehner."

"1 ^ The German pronunciation of the name Boehner/Böhner is [ˈbøːnɐ] buh-nair. However, Boehner's biography at House.gov recommends the pronunciation bay-ner."

I don't think that is correct. A closer to correct is burh-na, with the 'r' very rounded and short. Also, "-nair" is just wrong. The "-er" ending in German is essentially a short "a" sound, hence "-na." But, of course this all depends on his origin. What I have stated is correct in "Hochdeutsch" which is the "official" German language. As anyone who knows about German knows, though, there are a variety of major dialects and so depending on his family origin the "note" may be correct. It is just that the note states clearly that it is the "German" pronunciation and when using that term you are referring to Hochdeutsch.BinaryLust (talk) 23:35, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

That is probably correct. "buh-nair" was just my approximation. At least the IPA is correct. --bender235 (talk) 00:51, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Neutrality

Neutrality

I feel part of the article may be biased. It makes mention of President Obama attacking Boehner by "singling him out." Something like this should not really be here, its not really necessary factual information. Rather it just looks like someone trying to make Obama look bad instead.

You simply have to find a quote somewhere online that says Obama's attacking Boehner by "singling him out."Randnotell (talk) 03:25, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Quote from article: "" As Republican House Leader, Boehner is a Democratic target for criticism of Republican views and political positions. In July 2010, President Barack Obama began singling out Boehner for criticism during his speeches.[39] In one speech, Obama mentioned Boehner's name nine times[40] and accused him of believing that police, firefighters, and teachers were jobs "not worth saving."[41] ""

I firmly agree that the language used in this section comes across as biased. The first sentence is conjecture, which does not belong on Wikipedia at all. As for the rest, the wording could be changed easily and still relate the same information in a neutral manner, such as "President Barack Obama was reported to have been critical of Boehner in July 2010, etc..." although I would question the amount of detail that should be included here, in order to keep it brief and relevant in compliance with Wikipedia standards.--174.62.102.221 (talk) 22:30, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

At the time on PBS NewsHour both David Brooks (generally considered the conservative commentator) and Mark Shields (generally considered the liberal commentator) agreed that Obama was singling Boehner out during the Congressional 2010 election campaign. This was a well documented White House strategy that is well founded as opposed to slanted.--Brian Dell (talk) 15:47, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

If it's "well documented" then it shuld be able to be ...well documented. The source does not match what is being put forth. The source refers to one specific speech, and although it mentions him by name, does not indicate he is being singled out, but includes him with others also targeted in the speech. To say that one instance equates to leading to multiple is synthesis not represented by the source. The source does support that Obama targeted Boehner in that speech...nothing else. To draw further inferences from it is going beyond the source. I am assuming good faith and suggesting that it simply needs to be reworded to be supported by the source.204.65.34.94 (talk) 18:50, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

pronunciation of last name

I agree with bender235 and Ianbrettcooper. The pronunciation of the surname Boehner is indeed relevant, and It must be made clear that /ˈbeɪnɚ/ is not the right pronunciation but that used by Mr Boehner himself and, consequently, the media. Anyone with no knowledge of German whatsoever would naturally pronounce it ‘Boner’, but I suppose Mr Boehner was tired of the obvious puns and decided to invent the incorrect pronunciation Bayner. I still haven’t worked out why he didn’t choose to pronounce it ‘Burner’, which, as anyone with a smattering of German knows, sounds the same as the right pronunciation in German. I’ll wait some time, in case somebody decides to challenge me, and then I´ll put something along the lines of: “pronunciation used by himself and the media. Correct pronunciation in German: / bɜːnə/” Hindsighter (talk) 22:28, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

how the last name would be originally pronounced in german is totally irrelevant. going back a sufficient number of generations, all current americans stem from other countries, and no none bothers or tries to pronounce their names in the original language. take pelosi or obama, who both have last names of non-english origin. as a matter of fact, even american last names in the english language are pronounced differently from the way are in britain, the home of the english language. why on earth worry about boehner's "original" pronunciation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.154.0.250 (talk) 00:37, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Regardless of language (German, British, or American english), it's obvious that "Bay-ner" is the pronounciation for his name. Ever heard of Shawn Kemp, and his nickname "The Reignman?" It's pronounced like "Rain-man", not "Reen-man." rock8591 04:03, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Not only not obvious but not true, for German at least. 75.41.110.200 (talk) 19:12, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I disagree with the comment that it is irrelevant. It is actually quite interesting. It also shows a bias. That is, Italian, Spanish, Russian, Polish, a lot of Eastern European names, Indian, Chinese, etc. retain much if not all semblance to their original pronunciation. It may not be as flamboyantly so but it is darn close. I went to Italy with some Italian American friends and their names were pronounced by "real" Italians just like they had pronounced their name in America and these are 4th generation Italian Americans. The bias comes into play because you are probably used to Western European and German names. English and Irish names are by their nature pronounced the way you would like them and French names are pronounced with the effects or their vowels as they must in English. So then the question is back to Boehner and why his German name is pronounced the way it is. This relates to an interesting intersection of history and culture. Germans were fiercely assimilationist. "Real" German names are impossible to pronounce properly in English for the most part. Take Boehner. To pronounce it properly, you literally feel like you have to snap to attention and click your boots to make the sound. His name is pronounced (Hochdeutsch) as "BURH-na," with the "r" barely perceptible with it being more of a tool to pronounce the "u" properly which is not the same as an English "u" and the "-er" in English pronounced as a short "a"-ish sound. Hallo, Herr "BURH-na!" His name, like many German names, is awkward to pronounce properly in English and the Germans who simply wanted to assimilate to their new home chose to resound their names for American English consumption.BinaryLust (talk) 05:38, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Boehner is a German name. The fact that Mr. Boehner's name has a different pronunciation is relevant, since most readers would naturally assume it was to be pronounced the usual way. The pronunciation 'Bayner' is not at all 'obvious'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ianbrettcooper (talk • contribs) 19:16, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

• The only reasonable pronunciation is "John Boner". Everything else is humbug. My name is "MnuÜäfishdfa*%kkfudisl" - to be pronounced as Miller. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.108.225.84 (talk) 07:54, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Ianbrettcooper. It has to be explained that John Boehner wants his name pronounced differently then one would intuitively pronounce it. Boehner is a German name, derived from the Middle German word "bö(h)nen" (meaning "to board", "to lay a floor"). The original pronounciation would sound like buh-ner, or essentially with the "oe" sounding like the "ea" in early. The intuitive American pronounciation would be boner (compare Boeing, also a German name). But John Boehner wishes a different pronounciation, and that has to be explained. --bender235 (talk) 22:10, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

The "intuitive" American pronounciation is NOT "boner" by any means. I have not seen a single instance in real life where the letters "oe" next to each other produce a vowel sound "o". "Goetsch" rhymes with "Sketch", "Koetters" rhymes with "Kehtters". It's very rare (if existent at all) that 2 vowels next to each other result in the pronounciation of one of the vowels. Oftentimes, we see a different sound pronounced altogether; e.g. "reign" sounds like "rain". rock8591 04:21, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

I believe you are incorrect both in what you say about "boner" and your examples. All your examples are Americanizations of those words. Goetsch, assuming German, would be pronounced (Hochdeutsch) "GURT-sha." Pronounce this with an American accent and the "r" sound barely perceivable. That is, this isn't how the international phonetic standard would list it. I'm just trying to convey the proper sound as clearly as possible. As to Boehner itself I don't see how you find it odd that someone would pronounce it as "boner." This is exactly how most American native English speakers would pronounce it, including myself.BinaryLust (talk) 05:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

It is a universal practice to pronounce someone's name the way they pronounce it. To insist that someone is not pronouncing their last name correctly is just ridiculous. It is worth noting how the subject of an article pronounces their last name if it might not be as expected, but it is not worth speculating on the implications of the deviation. Kathleen Sibelius does not pronounce her last name like the composer, but to specualte as to what this may mean is just silly. Dwight Burdette (talk) 10:32, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Boehner in Category:American Roman Catholics

There is a bit of a dispute about whether Boehner should be in this category. I say yes. Boehner is open about his faith, sung in the choir, went to Catholic school, and has admitted that his faith plays a role in his political decisions. The category isn't just for men of the cloth; it is for people who are open about their faith; in which case Boehner belongs in this category Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 15:13, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't see that there is a dispute - wikipedia is very clear on this. see BLP#Categories

Category names do not carry disclaimers or modifiers, so the case for each category must be made clear by the article text and its reliable sources. Categories regarding religious beliefs or sexual orientation should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief or orientation in question, and the subject's beliefs or sexual orientation are relevant to their public life or notability, according to reliable published sources.

I agree it is not just for men of the cloth. It should also include nuns, missionaries, saints, martyrs, notable members of Opus Dei, theologians and heretics - and anyone else that has relevance and notability as verified by reference to reliable published sources. Simply put, unless and until there is an acceptably wikified section of someone's bio that outlines and describes how their religious actions, beliefs and attitudes make them notable then they should not be categorised accordingly.

The fact that the category has been interpreted as a catch-all Category:Americans of Catholic Heritage is no proof for inclusion of anyone, just how anyone justifies Al Capone's, John Gotti's and Paris Hilton's inclusion is beyond me. Serious culling needed. FanN | talk 16:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Funding resource Coal industry / Fossil fuels lobby

Funding resource Fossil fuels lobby ... by Brody Mullins in WSJ page A4 in print Coal Industry Backs Boehner; Donations of $1.5 Million This Year Show Effort to Limit Environmental Rules; excerpt ...

U.S. coal companies have pumped $1.5 million into House Speaker John Boehner's political operation this year, a sign of the industry's beefed-up efforts to fight new and proposed regulations from the Obama administration.

The coal industry now ranks as one of the top sources of cash for the Ohio Republican, rivaling such perennial GOP donors as Wall Street and the real-estate industry. A large part of the coal industry's donations came in a single week at the end of June.

Donations from coal-industry interests account for more than 10% of the $12.5 million Mr. Boehner collected from Jan. 1 to ...

99.181.147.115 (talk) 23:03, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Line of succession...

The Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives is NOT second in line to the President. The Speaker is third in line. The ariticle is factually WRONG.

Also, Nancy Pelosi did not proceed Barack Obama to the Presidency of the United State. George W. Bush did. One of the worst Presidents we have ever had who caused economic chaos to the U.S. economy and billions of wasted dollars on wars we could little afford and will not make as much of a difference in foreign policy as the diplomacy of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RosemaryTree (talk • contribs) 17:08, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Ya wow, I cannot believe all the incorrect facts on this page, the vice president is the 2nd in line. Beefcake6412 (talk) 17:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

No, the vice president is first in line. Speaker is second. 28bytes (talk) 18:01, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 2 December 2011

Change reference 24's broken link to this one: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/12/us/politics/12boehner.html?pagewanted=all

75.140.157.72 (talk) 10:36, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Done --Jnorton7558 (talk) 18:12, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

searching for "Boehner"

redirects to the smegma page. Someone should fix that. 74.132.249.206 (talk) 01:06, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. --Onorem♠Dil 02:52, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Proper pronunciation

The OE digraph in Boehner is properly pronounced like 'o' in 'hoe:' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oe_%28digraph%29#O

The way it's pronounced in the media is a bastardization. It should be pronounced BOE-ner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.94.157.6 (talk) 19:20, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 17 July 2012

John Boehner is know for crying a lot. He has even cried during interviews. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmlKCtvRet8

Djcruzify (talk) 19:58, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Not done: He is known for crying, but we need a reliable source for that. YouTube is not a reliable source. Floating Boat (the user formerly known as AndieM) 11:49, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit Request. Reflecting 2012 elections

Under the "U.S. House of Representatives" heading, replace the last sentence "He has been reelected 10 times with no substantial opposition, and even ran unopposed in 1994" with "He has been reelected 10 times with no substantial opposition, and has run unopposed in 1994 and 2012" Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_Ohio,_2012#District_8 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShroudedSciuridae (talk • contribs) 15:32, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 23 November 2012

Request the following to be added as a sub-section under Political Campaigns 2012

Boehner was not opposed by a Democratic candidate during the 2012 election. During the Republic Party Primary he was challenged by Tea Party affiliate and anti-abortion advocate Davis Lewis, and successfully defended his nomination.

Boehner was successful in his re-election bid; however, he was not completely unopposed as 2010 Constitution Party candidate Jim Condit Jr received 329 votes as a write in candidate. 24.69.72.99 (talk) 00:16, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:04, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 November 2012

Someone changed Boehner to Boner in Early life, education and career. 76.115.215.171 (talk) 07:52, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks. Wikipeterproject (talk) 08:09, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Fiscal Cliff

I propose to add, under Financial Crisis, a subsection about Boehner's position on the "fiscal cliff". I understand that Wikipedia is not a newspaper but this issue has been mentioned by Boehner over a period of time as important to him and is Wikipedia notable. As Speaker of the House, his actions or inactions, i.e meeting while America defaulted, is encyclopedic content. Please see below for my start and I hope better editors, who have BS degrees in Statistics, than me take up their mighty plumes and write fantastically.Geraldshields11 (talk) 03:34, 27 November 2012 (UTC)  ; added another refrence to show Wikipedia notability. Geraldshields11 (talk) 13:46, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Fiscal Cliff

− On November 16, 2012, the US leaders announced that President Obama (D) met with House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) "to discuss" the plan "to work on" a plan "over the weekend" "to create a plan" that would be ready to present the week of November 26, 2012 concerning the fiscal cliff.

Well he did offer his plan B:

In 2012, in response to Obama's plan to prevent the fiscal cliff, Boehner proposed his own "Plan B" to increase taxes on the poor in order to shelter almost half of the top one percent of taxpayers from tax increases.

Clear enough? Hcobb (talk) 16:11, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

No. Not clear enough. Again, a horrible misrepresentation of fact. A portion of the "poor" will see an increase. A portion of the "rich" will see an increase. Your wording is completely unacceptable. --Onorem♠Dil 16:47, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

"propagating" the house banking scandal

Maybe the word propagating is being used in a more learned form than I know about; but it sounds fishy, which is unfair to Boehner and the Gang of Seven. It should be changed to "worked to bring attention to the House Banking scandal" or similar wording.76.218.104.120 (talk) 05:14, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Financial Crisis

The sentence: "In 2013 Boehner lead his caucus in a strategy to hold Defense spending hostage in order to avoid reducing the deficit with revenue increases." is clearly a biased opinion and not fact based nor objective. It should be omitted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.77.86.129 (talk) 16:44, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I also don't understand how this is valid. The citation is a journalistic article. Also, this is not a factual use of the term "hostage." If using metaphorical language and personifying "Defense spending", then it makes sense, but how does that sort of prose belong on Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.1.62.109 (talk) 22:24, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 3 January 2013

"He received the gavel from outgoing Speaker Pelosi on Wednesday, January 5, 2012." should be changed to "He received the gavel from outgoing Speaker Pelosi on Wednesday, January 5, 2011." Ratterman (talk) 16:48, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Good catch. Since the year was on the line below the date it was not obvious. Done Arzel (talk) 17:43, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

John Boehner, U.S. House of Representatives speaker main photo

To respect the office of the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives', his or her photo deserves & needs to be updated to one that is current & recognizable, and it is not!Akg96 (talk) 19:39, 2 April 2013 (UTC) Alan Gerbracht

Campaign finance data

I'm working on a WikiProject to add campaign finance information to the pages of US elected officials. This information is available to the public from disclosures, and is strictly factual. Speaker Boehner is one of the officials I'd like to start with for this WikiProject. Before doing so, I'd like to gauge the reaction of other editors, especially given his prominence. Thoughts? Will Hopkins (talk) 23:39, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Seeing no objections, I have added a test table to Speaker Boehner's page. Feedback welcome. Will Hopkins (talk) 02:57, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Maplight is simply a combination of Open Secrets and Govtrack (see their About page), both of which are included in External links to give readers access to the very latest data. Hard-coding data from a particular point in time is misleading. Ballotpedia has done that, immediately before contributions by particular people were made. The casual reader is likely to assume the data is current, and not follow the link. Wikipedia is not Ballotpedia. Flatterworld (talk) 15:35, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Citation 38 is out of date

http://clerk.house.gov/legislative/house-rules.pdf

Here's a new working link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sahirrama (talk • contribs) 01:18, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

Birthplace

Our article says he was born in Reading, a suburb of Cincinnati. There is no ref given for this claim. The biographical reference given at the end of the article gives Cincinnati as his place of birth. Surely, the exact birth-place of a living person as prominent as he is should not be so hard to track down. 211.225.34.161 (talk) 23:15, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 December 2014

Please change "Boehner's biography at House.gov" to "Boehner's biography at House.gov" (to fix the broken link) Evanlenz (talk) 06:36, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thank you. -- Calidum 06:43, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Pronunciation of name

Actually, the distinction is between high-german and low-german. His recommended pronunciation is the correct pronunciation in low-german, which is dominant in certain geographical locations and communities.72.179.14.103 (talk) 16:18, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Its utterly obvious that "BAYner" is an affectation...most bearers of the name must endure being known as "Boners."24.167.52.195 (talk) 13:05, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Interesting that they neglected to mention that Boehner's mother was half African American. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gallaecian (talk • contribs) 22:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Interesting claim -- compare "Bei Mir Bist Du Schoen" which is generally pronounced with the "long a" sound. And the correct pronunciation in High German is closer to "Berner" as pronounced in Boston (silent first "r") ... was there a reason for the aside above? "Boner" is never the common pronunciation in a German community. Collect (talk) 13:14, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

I am talking about south Ohio here. In Ohio this man is just a "boner."24.167.52.195 (talk) 17:38, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Clearly you are anxious to call him a "boner" and that is your right - but your point in this discussion appears more aimed at using the word "boner" than for any actual encyclopedic purpose. This page, conversely, is aimed at actual discussions of encyclopedic value. Collect (talk) 18:04, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

It's interesting there is no mention that Boehner's mother was half African American. Gallaecian (talk) 22:09, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Recent Grindr controversy.

Since he has his own section for controversies, his Grindr escapades should be included. 76.112.172.179 (talk) 14:52, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Military Service

Simply stating that John Boehner was honorably discharged from military service only after 8 weeks, simply due to "bad luck", is not informative and does not explain the reasons behind his discharge. I fully agree and it should be changed. Tormegz (talk) 17:37, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 September 2015

Currently x under "Legacy" heading, 2nd paragraph By Paul Kane in the Washington Post emphasizes how none of the "big deals" he sought were ever reached.

Replacement y Paul Kane in the Washington Post emphasized how none of the "big deals" he sought were ever reached:

Specific changes firstly, drop the "By" at start of sentence because it is grammatically incorrect and appears to be a sloppy cut-and-paste of the byline from the source; secondly, change tense from present "emphasize" to past "emphasized" because it is a publishing event dated Sept. 25th; and thirdly, end with semi-colon to maintain parallel structure to the previous one-sentence paragraph that introduces quote.

Additional point/comment/question for your consideration: why are the four authors of the article in Politico [citation 89] unnamed in the text-body of this article, but Paul Kane is named as the author of the article in the Washington Post [citation 90]? Freditor (talk) 18:04, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

ok, 1) "By" dropped as typo. 2) "Emphasizes" = present tense used in historical analysis. 3) colon is used; 4) All the authors are properly named in the footnotes--but it is rare and awkward to list 4 coauthors in main text. Rjensen (talk) 18:26, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Already done. Thanks to Rjensen for fixing and Freditor for the request. Inomyabcs (talk) 00:22, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

semi-prot #3

Mainspace currently says:

• Members of the caucus indicated that the resignation opened the way for a "clean bill" for government funding to pass, and "a commitment [was] made that there [would] be no shutdown."[43]

Sentence should be removed as untrue; cite#43 is wapo story, which now says this at the bottom:

Correction: A version of this story said that members of the Freedom Caucus, a group of House conservatives, would support a spending bill that did not include language to ending funding for Planned Parenthood. In fact, caucus members contacted Friday — including a member who had been quoted in that context, Rep. John Fleming — said they will not vote for such a bill.

In other words, the early reports that Boehner's resignation would lead directly to harmonious unification of the establishment-faction and the freedom-caucus faction, were not in fact correct. Whether there is a shutdown over defunding planned parenthood, the ACA, or related debt-ceiling-matters of government spending, remains to be seen, and wikipedia should wait until Eric Cantor is the new speaker of... oh wait. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 12:27, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

• Done Thanks for the catch. Inomyabcs (talk) 22:48, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2015

Article states that only 2 previous Speakers have resigned. Stevenson and Wright. Believe there was 3 prior. Henry Clay resigned in 1814. When Speaker of the House Henry Clay was sent as commissioner to negotiate the Treaty of Ghent, Cheves succeeded him, defeating Felix Grundy. Cheves became the ninth Speaker on January 19, 1814, and served until March 4, 1815, when his Congressional term ended. (Wiki article on Cheves) 184.76.77.40 (talk) 01:13, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Inomyabcs (talk) 00:25, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Not WP:RS... but it is ironic to demand WP:RS, for a sentence in mainspace backed by "citation needed" as the source.  :^)     Please see Langdon_Cheves#Speaker_of_the_House, "When Speaker of the House Henry Clay was sent as commissioner to negotiate the Treaty of Ghent, Cheves succeeded him, defeating Felix Grundy. Cheves became the ninth Speaker on January 19, 1814, and served until March 4, 1815, when his Congressional term ended."

  WP:OR strongly suggests that speaker-elections were held in March 1813 (following the election of 1812), and lasted two years through March 1815. According to his infobox, Clay served as speaker from March 4, 1811 through January 19, 1814 ... so he was elected in March 1811 for a two-year-term, and then re-elected in March 1813 for a two-year-term, but left due to the War of 1812 (Clay was the 'spiritual leader' of the war-hawk-faction in congress). Wikipedia is silent on whether Clay actually resigned his speakership, but is clear that Clay served only 9 months ... much like Boehner... before being replaced. Here is the sentence in question:

• Boehner is the third U.S. Speaker of the House of Representatives in history to resign the office, after Andrew Stevenson and Jim Wright.

New edit request: suggest removing the entire sentence for the moment, since it looks like the citation really *is* needed. If only Stevenson and Wright and Boehner have resigned the office, please supply the WP:SOPROVEIT. If not, please yank the sentence, until we figure out *which* speakers have resigned, which speakers ahve been replaced midway through their terms without formally resigning, which speakers died in office (if any), and so on. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 13:23, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

After a bit of WP:GOOG it appears that Schulyer Colfax also resigned, during his third term as speaker, albeit that one might not "count" as a resignation since he only served one day of that third term, and was resigning because he was elected veep. See the article about Theodore M. Pomeroy for the details of the resignation-event. Ping User:Inomyabcs, it is definitely the case that Boehner is not the third speaker to resign. Depending on how one counts, Boehner is either the fourth, fifth, sixth, or seventh. But definitely not the third, so please remove the buggy sentence. 75.108.94.227 (talk) 14:05, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

 Done Inomyabcs (talk) 15:51, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Okay, ping User:Inomyabcs, here is what I think is the correct sentence:

• Boehner was the fifth person to resign as speaker (Clay resigned multiple times), or the fourth if Vice President Colfax's pro forma resignation is discounted.

References

The material in the sentence, and in the first footnote, is found at the second footnote. Would appreciate it, if somebody would double-check that I'm not missing something, and insert into mainspace if it looks good. p.s. Case in point, I just now figured out that Inomyabcs is short for I Know My ABCs... was imagining some kind of Inuit surname.  :-)     75.108.94.227 (talk) 05:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2015

Boehner was succeeded by Eric Cantor as Republican leader. Could that please be changed in the succession boxes? 2601:246:C504:5BC0:223:6CFF:FE93:8528 (talk) 04:58, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Done, I think. Template:US House Republican leaders already (still) shows Cantor succeeeding Boehner, but I reversed this edit. Wbm1058 (talk) 21:24, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on John Boehner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090513191556/http://johnboehner.house.gov/Biography/ to http://johnboehner.house.gov/Biography
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060829022048/http://www.rules.house.gov:80/ruleprec/109th.pdf to http://www.rules.house.gov/ruleprec/109th.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:00, 8 January 2016 (UTC)