RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs?

RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (Full Version)

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

Message

thishereboi -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 4:21:41 AM)
quote: In addition, he needs to ask the people to give him majorities in the House and Senate in order to correct past mistakes and deliver the change previously promised. They did. I received emails on a daily basis in the weeks leading up to the previous election. All of them begging for money and support to help the democrats hold their seats. It seems a lot of people ignored them.

KenDckey -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 4:26:29 AM)
hehehehehe I unplugged my phone. I didn't get one phone call that I can remember hehehehehehe

rulemylife -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 12:25:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda By all means, Rule. I'd be very interested. Because personally, I never noticed, and neither did anyone else that I know of. I'm always glad to help. Here is a start. Just let me know how many more you would like me to list. *White House unveils compromise health care* bill - CNN [image]http://www.google.com/images/icons/sectionized_ui/play_c.gif[/image]**Obama's compromise on healthcare reform I believe the subject was how many times Obama "abandon(ed) attempts at bi-partisanship and just made the republicans pay for their stubborness by beating them up in the press taking his case to the American People". This is an example of Obama caving in and giving the Republicans what they wanted because he didn't have the balls to stand up and fight them. You're just proving my point. Oh for God's sake Panda, how many times does he need to compromise? Now, after complaining that he does not compromise, you are calling his compromises "caving in".

Moonhead -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 12:30:26 PM)
I'm actually with the panda on this. The lad should have learned by now that the Repukes are not going to compromise on anything, and stopped bending over backwards to try and ingratiate himself to them. It's starting to get a bit Steppin Fetchit by now, frankly. The Kenyan can't seem to take a hint.

rulemylife -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 12:33:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead I'm actually with the panda on this. The lad should have learned by now that the Repukes are not going to compromise on anything, and stopped bending over backwards to try and ingratiate himself to them. It's starting to get a bit Steppin Fetchit by now, frankly. The Kenyan can't seem to take a hint. I'm not sure that is what Panda is trying to say. It seems to me that Obama is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

Moonhead -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 12:35:56 PM)
So far as I can tell, Panda's complaining that he isn't making more of an effort to push things through on his own terms, instead of fawning and grovelling. Given what Clinton managed to achieve while dealing with a Republican majority in both houses, that seems a pretty fair criticism to me.

mnottertail -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 12:36:54 PM)
Yeah, but he was gettin his dick sucked, so he was sorta half-republican in that way.

Moonhead -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 12:41:38 PM)
The really hilarious thing about that one is the way the fellatio caused him more trouble with the house and Gingrich than any of the eeeevil liberal legislation he thrust upon an unwilling nation. Maybe Gingrich was jealous, but he was the speaker of the house, for heaven's sake! If he wanted his cock sucked by an intern, maybe he should have just asked one if she was into the orals?

rulemylife -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 12:43:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead So far as I can tell, Panda's complaining that he isn't making more of an effort to push things through on his own terms, instead of fawning and grovelling. Given what Clinton managed to achieve while dealing with a Republican majority in both houses, that seems a pretty fair criticism to me. So which is it? We need more compromise or less? From what I have seen Obama's critics can't seem to make up their minds, and that was how I read his post, but I'll let him respond to what he actually meant.

domiguy -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 12:44:46 PM)
This is all ridiculous banter. If the economy wasn't in the shitter none of this would have taken place. Strong economy. Democrats give up no ground. Poor economy and the shit hits the fan. Anyone who wants to claim anything to the contrary is an idiot. Obama's only fault is not laying out the depth and gravity of the situation to the public. It wouldn't have really mattered. Politicians and the general public like to blame a President for the cyclical naure of the marketplace. That is the way it works.

TheHeretic -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 5:45:39 PM)
Getting back to the OP... So Violet, would you now care to comment on Pelosi's position that the remaining Dems in the House now need to do everything the can to stop the President from any compromise? Is blind obstructionism okay when Democrats do it? (there is another thread with the details - Pelosi to Obama)

VioletGray -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 6:25:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Getting back to the OP... So Violet, would you now care to comment on Pelosi's position that the remaining Dems in the House now need to do everything the can to stop the President from any compromise? Is blind obstructionism okay when Democrats do it? (there is another thread with the details - Pelosi to Obama) Certainly. They're not saying that he shouldn't ever compromise, they're saying that he shouldn't compromise any more.The fear among many democrats is that Obama has already gone way too far in his compromise, not that he's compromising at all. They feel like every time he reaches out to the GOP, they slap his hand away time and time again. It's like he's trying to use diplomacy in a boxing ring. Many people feel as though the republicans haven't tried to meet him halfway on anything at all, instead choosing to spend most of their time focusing the vast majority of their efforts into hurting his presidency.

Musicmystery -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 6:59:59 PM)
Pelosi is going to have a lot of fun. Minority leaders get to sit back and take shots all day. I'll bet she has stockpiled plenty of ammunition. And since Republicans are planning nothing but lots of theatrical stunts, she'll have plenty of targets.

ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 9:14:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead I'm actually with the panda on this. The lad should have learned by now that the Repukes are not going to compromise on anything, and stopped bending over backwards to try and ingratiate himself to them. It's starting to get a bit Steppin Fetchit by now, frankly. The Kenyan can't seem to take a hint. I'm not sure that is what Panda is trying to say. It seems to me that Obama is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Well, it's simple, Rule. I think you misunderstood something somewhere along the line. I said it's time Obama stopped trying to meet the republicans halfway, and started playing hardball with them - calling them out in the press for the amoral, unprincipled obstructionists that they are, and communicating directly to the American people about what he's trying to accomplish, why it's important to the country, and how the republicans are blocking it. You said he's already been doing that all along, and supported the assertion with an example of him... compromising and selling out to the republicans. I'm assuming you must have misunderstood what we're talking about, because your example seems to say the opposite of what I think you were trying to say.

TheHeretic -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/24/2010 10:30:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Pelosi is going to have a lot of fun. Minority leaders get to sit back and take shots all day. I'll bet she has stockpiled plenty of ammunition. That's just a brilliant strategy, Muse. It will be very helpful as President Obama tries to win back the voters he captured with promises of change, unity, and post-partisanship. Or are you buying drinking the "not liberal enough" kool-aid?

Musicmystery -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/25/2010 6:07:27 AM)
Welcome to America, Rich. It's straight from the Republicans' playbook. The majority takes the heat, while the minority heckles.

TheHeretic -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/25/2010 7:46:12 AM)
Lovely. Since the promise of a new playbook is how President Obama captured the imagination of the country, I'm sure that will work well for them in '12.

Musicmystery -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/25/2010 9:36:25 AM)
How's the wine over there, Rich? Pelosi is not Obama. One is not the other. I know spin is the way Republicans answer points, but try to focus here. Second, it worked VERY well for Republicans. Yes, I agree it's a crappy way to do things. Too bad that didn't occur to you before. In fact, it's explicitly the Republican strategy regarding Obama and '012.

rulemylife -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/25/2010 9:42:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda Well, it's simple, Rule. I think you misunderstood something somewhere along the line. I said it's time Obama stopped trying to meet the republicans halfway, and started playing hardball with them - calling them out in the press for the amoral, unprincipled obstructionists that they are, and communicating directly to the American people about what he's trying to accomplish, why it's important to the country, and how the republicans are blocking it. You said he's already been doing that all along, and supported the assertion with an example of him... compromising and selling out to the republicans. I'm assuming you must have misunderstood what we're talking about, because your example seems to say the opposite of what I think you were trying to say. Never mind, apparently I did misunderstand what you were saying.

Musicmystery -> RE: The GOP: Oppose Obama at all costs? (11/25/2010 9:43:30 AM)
No, rule, you misunderstood him from the start, seeing what you assumed instead of what he wrote.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875