Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

willbeurdaddy -> Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 6:00:05 AM)

I expect Obama to be in complete denial about what the election means, and promising to "communicate his agenda better". He doesnt know the meaning of compromise, and won't be able to find it in his Alinsky manual.



EternalHoH -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 6:03:54 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

He doesnt know the meaning of compromise




Ummmm, his ability to do "too much compromise" was his #1 criticism from his own left.



truckinslave -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 6:12:15 AM)

I expect him make false overtures of "working with the other side", soon to be followed by crocodile accusations of a lack of cooperation from Republicans. Meanwhile he will push the legal envelope and his agenda by executive orders and regulatory directives.

Which is fine. I agree with MM on the subject of giving these extremists another inch. They have to be stopped cold. I never believed in bipartisanship anyway.



willbeurdaddy -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 6:14:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EternalHoH

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

He doesnt know the meaning of compromise




Ummmm, his ability to do "too much compromise" was his #1 criticism from his own left.



Which just shows how ignorant of what goes on in Washington they are.



TheHeretic -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 6:47:36 AM)

No predictions from me. We are about to learn a bit more about who our President is. I expect a busy day at work, but will try to time a break to the press conference.



slvemike4u -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 7:59:29 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

I expect Obama to be in complete denial about what the election means, and promising to "communicate his agenda better". He doesnt know the meaning of compromise, and won't be able to find it in his Alinsky manual.
So I take it you felt the Republicans were in "complete denial" following the election of 2008?
Of course given that you agreed with them that ensuring that his Presidency is a one and done deal,no matter the cost to the nation,I'm sure you don't see it that way.



CreativeDominant -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 8:08:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

I expect Obama to be in complete denial about what the election means, and promising to "communicate his agenda better". He doesnt know the meaning of compromise, and won't be able to find it in his Alinsky manual.
So I take it you felt the Republicans were in "complete denial" following the election of 2008?
Of course given that you agreed with them that ensuring that his Presidency is a one and done deal,no matter the cost to the nation,I'm sure you don't see it that way.
Denial?  No...they learned. 

And speaking of denial...how about Obama and Pelosi and Reid making comments about "the Republicans are no longer driving this bus" or "they can move to the back of the bus if they want to ride or they can get off" while promising bipartisanship?  What about them locking Republicans out of meetings that dealt with what was brought to the American people and then, when what they brought didn't work, blaming it on the Republicans saying no?  Saying "no" to something they were not involved in creating doesn't seem like denial to me, it seems sensible.  Why should they say yes to something they did not agree with nor have a hand in?

When you refuse to allow the other party to have any sort of input...even if that input is "no", or "let's slow down and look at all the facts", or "I won't do it this way but I will do it THIS way AND let you have YOURS over here", then that is a denial of that party's existence.



slvemike4u -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 8:18:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

I expect Obama to be in complete denial about what the election means, and promising to "communicate his agenda better". He doesnt know the meaning of compromise, and won't be able to find it in his Alinsky manual.
So I take it you felt the Republicans were in "complete denial" following the election of 2008?
Of course given that you agreed with them that ensuring that his Presidency is a one and done deal,no matter the cost to the nation,I'm sure you don't see it that way.
Denial?  No...they learned. 

And speaking of denial...how about Obama and Pelosi and Reid making comments about "the Republicans are no longer driving this bus" or "they can move to the back of the bus if they want to ride or they can get off" while promising bipartisanship?  What about them locking Republicans out of meetings that dealt with what was brought to the American people and then, when what they brought didn't work, blaming it on the Republicans saying no?  Saying "no" to something they were not involved in creating doesn't seem like denial to me, it seems sensible.  Why should they say yes to something they did not agree with nor have a hand in?

When you refuse to allow the other party to have any sort of input...even if that input is "no", or "let's slow down and look at all the facts", or "I won't do it this way but I will do it THIS way AND let you have YOURS over here", then that is a denial of that party's existence.
So when Sen.DeMint states that defeating President Obama on health care reform(July 2009) will "break him" that it will be his "waterloo" this was the republicans trying to compromise and work with the President?
Please don't piss in my ear and tell me it's raining.



maybemaybenot -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 8:24:09 AM)

Obama is no Bill Clinton. Whatever he says today means nothing, his action from here forward are what matters. And I do not believe he has the character to compromise, to be gracious, to be inclusive or any other trait Clinton has.

I suspect Barack has gone from a one pack per day smoker to a two pack per day smoker overnight.

mbmbn



Musicmystery -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 8:50:26 AM)

In all fairness, cooperate with WHAT?

Nobody's coming forward saying, "Well, I hope the President will work with us on....." Quite the contrary--they have no intention of cooperating, as their majority leader has made explicit. Further, they have no solutions on which to work! The platform is the "tax cuts in good times or in bad, whatever the economic conditions" and "chip away at Roosevelt's New Deal as much as possible." [The "repeal health care reform" is empty rhetoric--they know much of that bill is popular, and of course Obama would veto such a repeal anyway.]

They plan to do nothing but theater from now to 2012.

Any actual work--infrastructure repairs, for example--will happen in the lame duck session. After that, welcome to gridlock.

Be realistic. NOTHING Obama could do would meet with official Republican approval. They successfully laid the blame for the recession at the feet of the Democrats--note they still have terrible approval ratings; they were simply in the position to benefit from the typical "vote 'em out" reaction every few years--significantly helped by the Supreme Court's short-sightedness in claiming that corporate campaign spending would be transparent, which allowed millions of undisclosed dollars to be dumped in normally sleepy backwater races. Next time, no doubt, Democrats will play that game too. This just gets worse and worse.

But to pretend there's anything waiting for presidential cooperation is either deliberate spin or incredible naivety. This isn't the 70s. The era of bipartisan cooperation is dead (despite that it's what voters want), and Republicans led the charge to destroy it. Gleefully.

Clinton learned to chop his agenda into small bits and work around the GOP. Obama will have to start using that intellect to get creative and stop pretending that force of personality will somehow usher in cultural change. He's not Nelson Mandela--peace prize not withstanding.

I hope he starts with a sweep of advisors, ones different from himself--and that he listens to the new ones.

Mere cooperation isn't going to do it--nor do Republicans want it.

As for the new Tea Party folks--they're going to learn that winning an election and governing a country are two very different things. Freshman congressmen do the grunt work of congress, and there's much of it to be done. Sweeping ideals (as Obama has learned too) are tough in the reality of contradictory choices that is governance. The country hasn't balanced budgets since the 1790s, and that's because when they do, the private sector suffers. Are they ready to balance the budget at the expense of the economy? They're about to get a frustrating course in Reality 101.

So what's going to happen? Nothing. And a lot of it, probably amid a great deal of noise.



maybemaybenot -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 9:10:25 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

In all fairness, cooperate with WHAT?




Cooperate with the will of their constituents, instead of their own personal agenda. That goes both ways, btw.

We send them to Washington to represent us. For example: My state's will is to continue the same path it has been on for two years, having reelected every Democrat on the ballot. Despite my own personal politics, I expect them to continue to do what they have been doing. That is what the majority of the constituents want.


mbmbn



Musicmystery -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 10:51:01 AM)

An obvious point, and not the topic the thread raises.

What constituents want is bipartisan cooperation. But if they think they just voted for it, they're sadly mistaken.



DomKen -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 11:03:13 AM)

I do like the revisionist history that had Clinton compromising with the Republicans.

The fact is the only significant element of the Contract on America that passed was the line item veto and that was promptly overturned by the Supremes. Gingrich et al tried to force Clinton to accept a ridiculous budget in 1995 and Clinton simply vetoed it which pretty much broke the GOP's back.



Musicmystery -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 11:06:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I do like the revisionist history that had Clinton compromising with the Republicans.

The fact is the only significant element of the Contract on America that passed was the line item veto and that was promptly overturned by the Supremes. Gingrich et al tried to force Clinton to accept a ridiculous budget in 1995 and Clinton simply vetoed it which pretty much broke the GOP's back.


Then you need to read, as I said no such thing, but rather:

quote:

Clinton learned to chop his agenda into small bits and work around the GOP.


You are correct that the Contract on America was never more than a stunt.



selfbnd411 -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 11:10:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

I expect Obama to be in complete denial about what the election means, and promising to "communicate his agenda better". He doesnt know the meaning of compromise, and won't be able to find it in his Alinsky manual.


Are you calling Obama a Tea Partier?

http://washingtonindependent.com/54554/conservatives-find-town-hall-strategy-in-leftist-text

Or maybe you're calling Obama John Boehner:

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, told conservative talk show host Sean Hannity that "This is not a time for compromise, and I can tell you that we will not compromise on our principles."



DomKen -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 11:10:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I do like the revisionist history that had Clinton compromising with the Republicans.

The fact is the only significant element of the Contract on America that passed was the line item veto and that was promptly overturned by the Supremes. Gingrich et al tried to force Clinton to accept a ridiculous budget in 1995 and Clinton simply vetoed it which pretty much broke the GOP's back.


Then you need to read, as I said no such thing, but rather:

quote:

Clinton learned to chop his agenda into small bits and work around the GOP.


You are correct that the Contract on America was never more than a stunt.

Sorry my post was a FR and not directed at you




CreativeDominant -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 12:27:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

An obvious point, and not the topic the thread raises.

What constituents want is bipartisan cooperation. But if they think they just voted for it, they're sadly mistaken.
Like they were when they voted for it when they elected Obama...the man who PROMISED bipartisanship and then let his lackeys...in the form of Reid and Pelosi...shut out the minority party at every turn with nary a word?

Republicans would be wrong to believe that the American people have again chosen the Republican agenda over the Democratic one.  BUT...Democrats would be mistaken...and Obama would be ill-served...by believing that last night's results are only a demonstration of his failure to communicate his agenda adequately.



TreasureKY -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 12:32:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

Republicans would be wrong to believe that the American people have again chosen the Republican agenda over the Democratic one.  BUT...Democrats would be mistaken...and Obama would be ill-served...by believing that last night's results are only a demonstration of his failure to communicate his agenda adequately.


Here, here!!!



Musicmystery -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 12:54:56 PM)

quote:

Republicans would be wrong to believe that the American people have again chosen the Republican agenda over the Democratic one. BUT...Democrats would be mistaken...and Obama would be ill-served...by believing that last night's results are only a demonstration of his failure to communicate his agenda adequately.


Yesterday was a referendum on the economy.

Both predictable and typical.



hertz -> RE: Predictions?: Petulant child or Clintonesque compromise (11/3/2010 3:24:17 PM)

In some ways this result is good news for Obama. The Republicans will no longer be able to bleat on about how Obama is destroying America. Now the Republicans will have to take a bit of responsibility for the inevitable car crash.

It's interesting that the focus is on Obama's need to compromise. If things go tits up now and the Tea Partyers are seen by the electorate as having been obstructive or unhelpful, then I guess they might get hammered too.

Everyone needs to compromise. Everyone needs to share responsibility for good or ill.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.640625E-02