• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

This year has been the longest three days of putin’s life.

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

The revolution will be supervised.

These are not very smart people, and things got out of hand.

When we show up, we win.

When you’re in more danger from the IDF than from Russian shelling, that’s really bad.

the 10% who apparently lack object permanence

Yeah, with this crowd one never knows.

So many bastards, so little time.

Let’s bury these fuckers at the polls 2 years from now.

Fight them, without becoming them!

There is no compromise when it comes to body autonomy. You either have it or you do not.

Republicans are the party of chaos and catastrophe.

When do we start airlifting the women and children out of Texas?

They punch you in the face and then start crying because their fist hurts.

Tick tock motherfuckers!

Humiliatingly small and eclipsed by the derision of millions.

Live so that if you miss a day of work people aren’t hoping you’re dead.

Pessimism assures that nothing of any importance will change.

Whatever happens next week, the fight doesn’t end.

Disagreements are healthy; personal attacks are not.

Fundamental belief of white supremacy: white people are presumed innocent, minorities are presumed guilty.

Boeing: repeatedly making the case for high speed rail.

We cannot abandon the truth and remain a free nation.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Boehner’s Apartment

Boehner’s Apartment

by John Cole|  February 8, 20069:53 am| 54 Comments

This post is in: Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

This is an odd story that sounds more sensational than it probably is:

Rep. John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), who was elected House majority leader last week, is renting his Capitol Hill apartment from a veteran lobbyist whose clients have direct stakes in legislation Boehner has co-written and that he has overseen as chairman of the Education and the Workforce Committee.

The relationship between Boehner, John D. Milne and Milne’s wife, Debra R. Anderson, underscores how intertwined senior lawmakers have become with the lobbyists paid to influence legislation. Boehner’s primary residence is in West Chester, Ohio, but for $1,600 a month, he rents a two-bedroom basement apartment near the House office buildings on Capitol Hill owned by Milne, Boehner spokesman Don Seymour said yesterday. Boehner’s monthly rent appears to be similar to other rentals of two-bedroom English basement apartments close to the House side of the Capitol in Southeast, based on a review of apartment listings.

***

Milne could not be reached by phone or e-mail. His wife, Anderson, who is on the advisory board of mCapitol, said she and her husband have been friends with Boehner and his wife for years. After buying the house in 2004, she said, she mentioned at a social gathering that they had a place to rent, and Boehner said he was interested.

Anderson described Boehner as an “excellent tenant” who pays his rent on time.

If he is paying fair market value, I don’t see what the big deal is.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Praying for the Climate
Next Post: Neanderthal Nincompoop Nailed At NASA »

Reader Interactions

54Comments

  1. 1.

    Jim Allen

    February 8, 2006 at 10:03 am

    The “big deal” is not the rent (which is typical, I guess, based on a quickie search of apartment listings in the WaPo classifieds), but that he’s renting it from “a veteran lobbyist whose clients have direct stakes in legislation Boehner has co-written and that he has overseen as chairman of the Education and the Workforce Committee.”

    Even if there is no real conflict of interest, there is the appearance of such. You’d think that someone elected on a platform of reform wouldn’t be dopey enough to think that wouldn’t be pointed out.

  2. 2.

    Marcus Wellby

    February 8, 2006 at 10:06 am

    Boehner’s monthly rent appears to be similar to other rentals of two-bedroom English basement apartments close to the House side of the Capitol in Southeast, based on a review of apartment listings.

    Either is is similiar or it is not — “appearing” similiar doesn’t mean crap. How about listing what those similiar apartments go for a month? Damn, aren’t journalists supposed to check facts and verify their statements?

    A quick glance at craigslist shows similiar apartments ranging from $950-$3550. This is not a scientific survey, but I will wager Boehner isn’t living in some crappy Laverne & Shirley type basement apartment.

  3. 3.

    DecidedFenceSitter

    February 8, 2006 at 10:11 am

    1600 is cheap in DC. Friends had a crappy 2 BR up in NE DC, bad part of town, basement of a house. Flooded every heavy rain.

    1100. Something tells me he’s getting more than 500 dollars of value over what they had.

  4. 4.

    Mr Furious

    February 8, 2006 at 10:12 am

    Yup. Jim’s right.

    I think the story is more using the rental to lllustrate the relationship he has with a major lobbyist, (whether personal or merely landlord/tenant) and that it might be inappropriate to be beholden to someone who brings business before the House.

    This would be less of a big deal if Boehner wasn’t supposed to be the “reformer” who is coming in to clean up after DeLay. A guy who sells himself as such, might want to consider that he lives in a lobbyist’s basement, and I think its fair to point it out.

  5. 5.

    Marcus Wellby

    February 8, 2006 at 10:16 am

    Is there any way to find out if this lobbyist makes a monthly payment of $1600 to Boehner’s reelection campaing? :)

  6. 6.

    Pb

    February 8, 2006 at 10:19 am

    The point, John, is simply what they say in the article–“The relationship between Boehner, John D. Milne and Milne’s wife, Debra R. Anderson, underscores how intertwined senior lawmakers have become with the lobbyists paid to influence legislation”. I don’t know if your landlord is a lobbyist, but mine isn’t.

    And these two are big-time lobbyists–they donate (or funnel) tens of thousands of dollars in any given election cycle, including $901 directly to Boehner from Debra Anderson. John Milne is a member of at least three lobbying firms. And they’re buddy-buddy with Boehner. There may be nothing illegal going on, but I find it disturbing nonetheless.

  7. 7.

    Anderson

    February 8, 2006 at 10:26 am

    More interesting to me is that Boehner’s already come out against banning lobbyists’ paying for junkets.

    Josh Marshall (quoting Newsweek):

    “Over the years, [John Boehner] has made the most of controversial rules allowing members to accept free trips to luxury retreats around the world. Since 2000, Boehner has taken more than $150,000 worth of junkets paid for by private interests–ranking him in the top 10 of all members of Congress.”

    Quite a little reformer they’ve elected.

  8. 8.

    Jill

    February 8, 2006 at 10:42 am

    Has Boehner shown any cancelled checks for $1600? He may say he’s paying $1600 but should we take his word without any checking on that fact?

  9. 9.

    John Cole

    February 8, 2006 at 10:54 am

    I don’t think anyone thought of Boehner as the reform candidate- that was clearly Shadegg. Boehner positioned himself close to Shadegg, and gave off the appearances of being the reformer, but he was clearly the compromise candidate between Shadegg and Blunt.

    At any rate, I don’t think the appearance is healthy, either, but if he isn’t doing anything wrong, I fail to see how this is a big deal.

  10. 10.

    ChristieS

    February 8, 2006 at 11:04 am

    At any rate, I don’t think the appearance is healthy, either, but if he isn’t doing anything wrong, I fail to see how this is a big deal.

    Perception is everything, nowadays.

    Renting an apartment from a lobbyist isn’t wrong. Renting an apt from a friend isn’t wrong. Having that friend/landlord/lobbyist come up before your committee for business reasons gives the appearance of possible impropriety.

    It would have been better for all concerned to have worked out a way to avoid any hint of conflict of interest. Even if there hasn’t been any shenanigans, why set yourself up for the aggravation?

  11. 11.

    Jim Allen

    February 8, 2006 at 11:09 am

    Re: “At any rate, I don’t think the appearance is healthy, either, but if he isn’t doing anything wrong, I fail to see how this is a big deal.”

    Agreed. But, as Christie points out, it’s pretty stupid to hand your opponents ammunition.

  12. 12.

    JWeidner

    February 8, 2006 at 11:24 am

    Perception is everything, nowadays.

    Bingo. Right or wrong, perception is becoming what wins the day. Even if you’ve done nothing wrong, if the perception is there that you have, that can be enough to crucify you.

    Fer instance John, take a look at those televised talking head prosecutors you hate (I don’t remember their names). They spin guilty “verdicts” in public opinion long before an actual trial, and base it solely on their perception of whatever is the case du jour.

  13. 13.

    Zifnab

    February 8, 2006 at 11:32 am

    If he is paying fair market value, I don’t see what the big deal is

    Hey, it’s Washington. Just getting a good apartment close to the Capital could conceivably be a challenge. I doubt they’ll ever make “ad hoc real-estate agent” a federal offense even if they do crank up anti-lobbying legislation, but this still recks of bribery in one form or another.

    At the minimum its classic Good Ole Boy’s Club back scratching. At the worst, he’s getting a $1600/month bribe. Either way, it’s indicative of DeLay-style politics.

  14. 14.

    Steve

    February 8, 2006 at 11:37 am

    I don’t know that this breaks any rules, if he paid fair market value, he’s actually paying the money, he’s not doing the guy any favors because of it, etc.

    But that’s the point. We don’t know any of these things, and we shouldn’t be in a position where we have to demand cancelled checks just to be sure our lawmakers aren’t on the take.

    As a lawyer, there are very strict ethical rules that apply if I ever want to enter into a business arrangement with a client. It doesn’t matter whether I’m actually doing anything wrong. The rules err on the side of protecting the client, and for the same reason, the ethical rules for legislators should err on the side of protecting the public.

    Congressmen simply shouldn’t be entering into business arrangements with people who lobby them. There are plenty of other people he could rent an apartment from.

  15. 15.

    Doug

    February 8, 2006 at 11:38 am

    If the Republicans didn’t create the “K Street Project,” and if Abramoff didn’t have his corrupt fingers in so many Republican pies, and if the House Ethics Committee had lifted a finger before “Duke” Cunningham and Tom DeLay were indicted, and if Republicans had a well-founded reputation for integrity in the face of lobbyist temptation, then this wouldn’t be a big deal.

    But, the rules of the game are that if your prior leader gets bounced because of ethical concerns, then your new leader has to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

    That’s what the big deal is.

  16. 16.

    Amy

    February 8, 2006 at 11:51 am

    So… you rent a place from a friend who happens to be a lobbyist, pay him market-rate for the place, and you’re somehow in his pocket? Did anyone stop to ask what this guy even actually lobbies for? Has Boehner actually changed his position on something as a result of his lobbying? Boehner’s probably always been against the minimum wage (or against raising it, at least), for example. So what’s the point of this story? To trash a Republican leader, that’s about it. Pointless.

  17. 17.

    Lines

    February 8, 2006 at 11:54 am

    The biggest news of the week, our AG not being sworn in and basically having his testicles rubbed by naked, shaved Republicans in the Judicial Oversight Committee, and John Cole wants to discuss Boner’s apartment?

    The end of our system of checks and balances vs. Boner’s taint.

    Friggin Bizzaro World.

  18. 18.

    techson

    February 8, 2006 at 11:55 am

    I lived on Cap Hill for 8 years… $1600 for an english basement is not out of the question… perhaps a little low. The comparison to NE cribs is not valid. Unless you work on the Hll, most people do not want to live there. Particularly younger people as the hill is quiet and doesn’t have much of a nightlife. It is a stupid thing for Boehner to do.

  19. 19.

    Pb

    February 8, 2006 at 12:00 pm

    Amy,

    Did anyone stop to ask what this guy even actually lobbies for?

    Yes. Follow the link in my post, check out the three lobbying firms involved, etc. They lobby for a bunch of different stuff–defense contractors, computer companies, etc. And, as I said before, Debra Anderson also contributed $901 directly to Boehner.

  20. 20.

    Cyrus

    February 8, 2006 at 12:20 pm

    But that’s the point. We don’t know any of these things, and we shouldn’t be in a position where we have to demand cancelled checks just to be sure our lawmakers aren’t on the take.

    As a lawyer, there are very strict ethical rules that apply if I ever want to enter into a business arrangement with a client. It doesn’t matter whether I’m actually doing anything wrong. The rules err on the side of protecting the client, and for the same reason, the ethical rules for legislators should err on the side of protecting the public.

    Steve has a point. Lawyers, doctors, teachers, hell, I think maybe even pharmacists have lots of guidelines for professional conduct that are entirely seperate from the law. Lots of companies have internal ethics policies. You can get disbarred or fired or have your license revoked for conduct that isn’t criminal in any sense, and probably even shouldn’t be. These rules are there for a lot of reasons, one of which is to avoid the appearance of impropriety. (I seem to remember you opposed “black box” voting systems on a similar principle, John.)

    But it looks like no such rules exist for legislators. Partly, of course, enforcing it would be more complicated than for lawyers – you don’t and shouldn’t need a permit of some kind to run for office. But to avoid the appearance of impropriety, to keep the temptation of worse offenses out of reach, to make some feeble attempt at impartiality, and to make sure that they’re doing the right thing rather than just obeying the letter of the law (which is especially meaningless, since they write the law!), such a code is badly needed for lawmakers.

    In fact, I would take the law out of it completely. Bohner’s apartment shouldn’t be illegal, unless he’s getting it completely rent-free. But it gives a new meaning to the phrase “in bed with lobbyists”, and that should be stopped.

  21. 21.

    Jorge

    February 8, 2006 at 1:03 pm

    When did the standard for ethics and proper behavior become whether something was legal or not?

    Let’s say I sue John Cole. Then we find out that not only do I, my wife, my company, and my friends contribute to the presiding judge’s campaign and are good friends with the judge, but my lawyer, his firm and his other clients also donate to the judge’s campaign. Not only that, but the judge has said that he will only allow clients with lawyers who contribute to the judge’s or judge’s friends campaign to come before his court. Also, my lawyer occasionally arranges for the judge to go on “business” golf trips for free or is the landlord of the judge. Would anyone in the world believe that judge has any business presiding over the trial?

    And when it comes to laws, congressmen are not just the judge but the jury as well.

  22. 22.

    Mac Buckets

    February 8, 2006 at 1:21 pm

    Greeeeat, now we get to find out what Congresspeople are paying what to whom for their DC pads. I hope everyone is prepared to castigate the all other party’s renters as deceitful shills and defend their own party’s renters as honest tenents! Oh, wait, everyone here is fully willing to do that.

  23. 23.

    Amy

    February 8, 2006 at 1:24 pm

    Pb — Deb Anderson, who is NOT a lobbyist, gave Boehner money at one point? I’m shocked. SHOCKED!

    Funny how Edsall doesn’t mention this:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A28735-2003Mar25?language=printer

    You think he just wanted to smear a Republican? Nah.

  24. 24.

    Mac Buckets

    February 8, 2006 at 2:04 pm

    By the way, Boehner’s Apartment would be a good name for a band, if he pronounced it “Boner.” Pronounced in the correct German…not so much.

  25. 25.

    Steve

    February 8, 2006 at 2:06 pm

    Greeeeat, now we get to find out what Congresspeople are paying what to whom for their DC pads. I hope everyone is prepared to castigate the all other party’s renters as deceitful shills and defend their own party’s renters as honest tenents! Oh, wait, everyone here is fully willing to do that.

    No, actually, the point of having bright-line ethical rules is that none of us wants to go digging through every legislator’s receipt drawer. The reason why rules are written to avoid the appearance of impropriety is that it’s a pain in the ass to investigate every appearance of impropriety just to find out if it’s a real impropriety.

    Private transactions between legislators and lobbyists should either be prohibited or else subject to disclosure and prior approval by the Ethics Committee. Put some tough rules in place and enforce them. There’s no good reason to do otherwise.

  26. 26.

    Jack Roy

    February 8, 2006 at 2:10 pm

    Sheesh. No, there’s no big deal here. If the guy bought candy bars from Mars Co. and Mars Co. had business before the House, would anyone think it mattered? And yes, if he’s not really paying rent or getting a sweetheart deal, that’s bad, but when did it become acceptable to force a Congressman to prove he’s not on the take, rather than resting the burden of proof on his accusers?

    Still, the kind of questions posted above do explain why many public figures have prophylactic procedures to ensure they avoid even the appearance of impropriety. And wise though they may be, they’re cautionary over-compensation, not dictates about what the rules actually are.

  27. 27.

    Jack Roy

    February 8, 2006 at 2:14 pm

    In fact, I would take the law out of it completely. Bohner’s apartment shouldn’t be illegal, unless he’s getting it completely rent-free. But it gives a new meaning to the phrase “in bed with lobbyists”, and that should be stopped.

    New meaning, perhaps, but unnecessary; Tom Daschle’s wife was a lobbyist while he was in the Senate. That phrase already has better meaning.

    Seriously, lobbying is dirty business, even when it’s clean, and I’m sure we all agree that things would be better if fund-raising were unnecessary and DC lobbyists didn’t enjoy any leg up on the average citizen. But that’s not the world we live in. I want to be outraged by Republicans as much as anyone, but this is ridiculous.

  28. 28.

    Pb

    February 8, 2006 at 2:19 pm

    Amy,

    Deb Anderson, who is NOT a lobbyist

    Bullshit. Are you saying that she lied to the FEC, or just that you’re a moron?

    gave Boehner money at one point? I’m shocked.

    You shouldn’t be; as I’ve said, they’ve each given out tens of thousands of dollars.

    Funny how Edsall doesn’t mention this

    He could have, but it’s a bit old. However, that article makes the same point, and does it rather well.

  29. 29.

    stickler

    February 8, 2006 at 2:54 pm

    Still, the kind of questions posted above do explain why many public figures have prophylactic procedures to ensure they avoid even the appearance of impropriety. And wise though they may be, they’re cautionary over-compensation, not dictates about what the rules actually are.

    Given the spectacular ethical and legal gaffes the GOP Congressional leadership has committed in the last ten years, this newest story is just par for the course. Renting your apartment from a lobbyist, whatever the price, looks very bad in the era of DeLay and Abramoff and the Dukestir and the Ohio GOP. It is the polar opposite of “cautionary over-compensation,” as anyone with even marginal reading skills could instantly recognize.

    So the real lesson here has nothing to do with prophylactics. It’s that the House GOP had a chance to embrace reform (however pale that might have been under Shadegg), and instead made Boehner majority leader. Thereby giving the press corps the same kind of “bring ’em on” challenge that Gary Hart gave back in the ’80s. It’s likely to end the same way. Or does anyone really think that Boehner’s ethical problems are going to end with this revelation? Come on.

  30. 30.

    Paddy O'Shea

    February 8, 2006 at 2:59 pm

    Naw, no impropriety here.

  31. 31.

    BadTux

    February 8, 2006 at 3:06 pm

    When I was a teacher, there was no law that said I was not allowed to be alone in my classroom with a student. But I didn’t do it anyhow, because the mere appearance of impropriety, even if I were only discussing the young lady’s homework, was enough to send shudders up my spine. Even the slightest hint of impropriety would have opened me up to accusations in the future that I was doing things like, say, maybe trading sexual favors for grades.

    Boehner shouldn’t have taken this apartment for the same reason. Maybe he’s not doing anything wrong or illegal, but it looks wrong. Which, in today’s environment, is good enough reason not to do it.

    This is just common sense. But then, I forget, common sense ain’t so common…

    – Badtux the Snarky Penguin

  32. 32.

    Paul Wartenberg

    February 8, 2006 at 3:10 pm

    If he is paying fair market value, I don’t see what the big deal is.

    I think the deal is that, at this moment, having a party leader connected in any way to a lobbyist that does business with the committees that party leader oversees is simply poor public relations. It simply doesn’t look good.

    This probably says more about how tied up lobbyists and politicians are to each other, even in totally honest and innocent ways, because the problem is how can we tell if it IS totally honest and innocent anymore?

  33. 33.

    Cyrus

    February 8, 2006 at 3:24 pm

    New meaning, perhaps, but unnecessary; Tom Daschle’s wife was a lobbyist while he was in the Senate. That phrase already has better meaning.

    Then he shouldn’t have been kept in office.

    Seriously, lobbying is dirty business, even when it’s clean, and I’m sure we all agree that things would be better if fund-raising were unnecessary and DC lobbyists didn’t enjoy any leg up on the average citizen. But that’s not the world we live in. I want to be outraged by Republicans as much as anyone, but this is ridiculous.

    Lobbying, pork, mutual back-scratching, exclusive access, and all the similar tricks of the trade that reward people like Randy Cunningham are bad even if they (some of them) should remain legal. Something should be done about it. At the moment it looks to me like the problem is much worse among the Republicans than the Democrats, but if I’m wrong so be it and I realize it’s at least somewhat bipartisan. It won’t be easy, obviously, but on the other hand, it’s not like we’re talking about social engineering that goes completely against the grain of human nature either. And I’m not holding out for “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington”, just for a day when stuff like this gets more attention than, for example, a candidate’s marital status. A lot of Congressmen have legal licenses and they manage to avoid getting disbarred. (Most of them.) They should be held to the same standard in their higher-profile job.

    How to do it? Well, if it was obvious enough that even I could figure it out, it would be done. A legislator’s equivalent of the bar association, which is the comparison I keep coming back to, would need more to hold over their heads than just an endorsement. A body that donates to certain candidates? It would need extremely deep pockets to compete. Lobbying reform? It’s setting the fox to watch the henhouse, but it’s the best thing that comes to mind.

  34. 34.

    Anderson

    February 8, 2006 at 3:31 pm

    The biggest news of the week, our AG not being sworn in and basically having his testicles rubbed by naked, shaved Republicans in the Judicial Oversight Committee

    What a frightening vision. How are you using the word “basically”? Because I guess in that sense of the word, I fucked Scarlett Johannson when I looked at this picture. Basically, that is.

  35. 35.

    Veeshir

    February 8, 2006 at 3:31 pm

    I figure the Wash Post had a bunch of time invested in this non-story and hey, they could put a Republican’s name and a lobbyist in the same headline so…

    Remember, if it’s bad for the GOP it’s good for the Washington Post, the Democrats and America, as far as they are concerned.

  36. 36.

    The Other Steve

    February 8, 2006 at 3:44 pm

    It would be difficult for any congress critter to rent an apartment and not have a landlord who was somewhat influenced by the congress critters actions. We’re all citizens here.

    So, yeah, on that I could see it wouldn’t be much of a story.

    The reason this is a story is because the GOP is owned by lobbyists, and we have yet another leader who is conveniently too close to lobbyists.

    Those claiming it’s not a story are dreaming.

  37. 37.

    Pooh

    February 8, 2006 at 3:49 pm

    Honestly, this is Ethics 101 stuff. It’s important enought to avoid potential conflicts that one should be leery of even the appearance of potential conflicts. This may be similar to the Vanguard issue with Alito – nothing bad happened, but he should have known better than to be involved, regardless. More of an “oops” than “an outrage” but still.

    In other news, your site appears to be experiencing something of a rebirth, John, we have a fresh batch of Senator Darrells between this thread and the “The Funeral Thread that Shall Not Be Named”

  38. 38.

    Faux News

    February 8, 2006 at 4:22 pm

    Quite a little reformer they’ve elected.

    SHHH! Don’t make John more angry than he already is this week. He has been quite the bitchy Shrill the past few days despite the Steeler’s win on Sunday.

  39. 39.

    Vlad

    February 8, 2006 at 6:58 pm

    I wonder whether sacks of Krugerrands mysteriously show up in Boehner’s fridge from time to time.

  40. 40.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    February 8, 2006 at 7:18 pm

    John, if you don’t see what the big deal is then you have a lot to learn about political strategy.

    Imagery is everything my friend.

  41. 41.

    Steve

    February 8, 2006 at 7:45 pm

    I’m not trying to be a conspiracy theory guy (allusion to a prior JC post), but I do find it a little odd that this new poster “Amy” suddenly shows up in a not-very-interesting thread about Rep. Boehner and starts angrily shilling for the Congressman. Maybe I’m biased by the unmasking of another commentor as an actual United States Senator, but I just find it strange.

  42. 42.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    February 8, 2006 at 7:59 pm

    By the way, Boehner’s Apartment would be a good name for a band, if he pronounced it “Boner.” Pronounced in the correct German…not so much.

    So he name is correctly pronouced as Bay-ner? I don’t know. It sure as hell looks like Bo-ner to me. Any source for this?

  43. 43.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    February 8, 2006 at 8:00 pm

    *his

    *sigh*

  44. 44.

    AlanDownunder

    February 8, 2006 at 8:16 pm

    If he is paying fair market value, I don’t see what the big deal is.

    No big deal if –

    – no client of the landlord/lobbyist expects extra mileage from the tenancy relationship.

    – landlord does not expect extra access from and favoured treatment because of the tenancy relationship.

    – tenant is not disposed to favour landlord’s clients because of the tenancy relationship.

    Now, do we believe in the tooth fairy or don’t we?

  45. 45.

    Pb

    February 8, 2006 at 10:09 pm

    Steve,

    I’m not trying to be a conspiracy theory guy (allusion to a prior JC post), but I do find it a little odd that this new poster “Amy” suddenly shows up in a not-very-interesting thread about Rep. Boehner and starts angrily shilling for the Congressman.

    I’m not sure if she’s ‘new’ or just infrequent. But you never know, it could be anyone, possibly including a staffer with too much time on her hands. I can tell you that real Congress critters post on Daily Kos from time to time, and even more often they have their staffers watching the place. I’d be surprised if Balloon Juice intentionally rose to that level of scrutiny, though.

  46. 46.

    Richard 23

    February 8, 2006 at 11:16 pm

    “If he is paying fair market value, I don’t see what the big deal is.”

    Oh, really? Of all the places to live on the hill, Boner just happens to choose a fine pad in a popular neighborhood owned by a shady character who he happens to support legislation for?

    OK, I’m convinced.

    And I think it’s pronounced “Bow-ner.”

  47. 47.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    February 8, 2006 at 11:55 pm

    Dude, it’s Bo-ner.

    Until I see otherwise, I’m pronouncing it that way.

  48. 48.

    searp

    February 9, 2006 at 5:06 am

    John Cole: no big deal, business as usual.

  49. 49.

    Mac Buckets

    February 9, 2006 at 12:17 pm

    So he name is correctly pronouced as Bay-ner? I don’t know. It sure as hell looks like Bo-ner to me. Any source for this?

    As funny as the other way would be, and as hilarious (in a Beavis way) as that would make newscasts for the next few years, I’m afraid the correct (Americanized) German pronunciation would be Bay-ner.

  50. 50.

    Mac Buckets

    February 9, 2006 at 12:19 pm

    Tom Daschle’s wife was a lobbyist while he was in the Senate. That phrase already has better meaning.

    And thus endeth the discussion.

  51. 51.

    Mr Furious

    February 9, 2006 at 1:13 pm

    Hilarious Jack Cafferty / Wolf Blitzer CNN clip regarding the apartment. Go watch it.

    [30-second Quicktime clip via Crooks and Liars]

  52. 52.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    February 9, 2006 at 1:55 pm

    As funny as the other way would be, and as hilarious (in a Beavis way) as that would make newscasts for the next few years, I’m afraid the correct (Americanized) German pronunciation would be Bay-ner.

    The WaPo article doesn’t actually state that the correct way to say it. It merely says that is the way he pronounces it. I know he says it’s Bay-ner, but he has an obvious conflict on interest as anyone with the name Boehner wouldn’t want to pronounce it Bo-ner.

    I meant do you have a source about the origin/correct way to say it according to linguists.

  53. 53.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    February 9, 2006 at 1:55 pm

    *of interest

  54. 54.

    Smitty

    February 9, 2006 at 3:43 pm

    Don’t “they” get some sort of allowance for DC lodging?

    I think I’d buy a fixer in the worst part of town then goon out all the local scum & sell out when un-elected.

    I’d hate to be renter scum anywhere.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - lashonharangue - Along the Zambezi River [2 of 2] 8
Image by lashonharangue (7/8/25)

World Central Kitchen

Donate

Recent Comments

  • WTFGhost on Sportsball Open Thread: Suprise! FIFA Says It Can Work With Don TACO (Jul 8, 2025 @ 10:34pm)
  • RevRick on Wisconsin Is A Reminder of Why We Should Never Give up (Jul 8, 2025 @ 10:31pm)
  • MrPug on We Should All Be So Lucky (Jul 8, 2025 @ 10:22pm)
  • Anonymous At Work on Sending a good idea to the big farm upstate (Jul 8, 2025 @ 10:16pm)
  • NotMax on Sportsball Open Thread: Suprise! FIFA Says It Can Work With Don TACO (Jul 8, 2025 @ 10:15pm)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
No Kings Protests June 14 2025

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Feeling Defeated?  If We Give Up, It's Game Over

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!