The Campaign is over...

Ok, but it also causes Division to mis-represent his policies and also assassinate his character and his wife's as well. It was the same under Bush. Division will always run rampant so-long as Information Technology continues to expand and hate-monger Commentators continue to rip on Presidents as fascists or Nazi's.

Yeah... in a free society, people will talk. That doesn't mean that the principle political players must engage in it themselves. But look who's referring to American citizens as "evil-mongers" and comparing them with Nazis. That'd be Reid and Pelosi... the leadership of our bicameral Congress. :eek:

It was Obama's job to set the tone in Washington. But right out of the box, he handed off to Nancy Pelosi on Porkulus. What he should have done was to privately give both her and Reid his expectation that the legislation be truly bipartisan, and let them know that if they brought him something that wasn't... he'd send it back. This would have been in keeping with the promises that he made on the trail and would have set an entirely different tone in Washington. It would have demonstrated a commitment to executive leadership, and thus, leadership of ALL citizens. Not just the half that agree with him.

He fucked up. And the only way he can fix it is to walk it back and start again. He could do that easily by addressing it as a "gridlock" issue that he's identified as a priority. But... he would have to actually mean it, and he'd have to follow through on it, treating ALL our representatives with an even hand.

He has caused a SERIOUS deficit of trust, and only a Solomon-like effort can save him. He can't afford to keep alienating half the citizens of this country. And if his efforts at bipartisanship are not honest... AND effective... he may as well resign and let Joe Biden finish his term. It'll all end up the same anyway if he doesn't pull his head out of his ass and engage in EXECUTIVE leadership. It's well-past time to leave the legislature behind, to the people whose job it still is be there.
 
Last edited:
It's not possible to play from one side of the field and still represent both sides. He CAUSES division, at a time when the country is better served by harmony.

Ok, but it also causes Division to mis-represent his policies and also assassinate his character and his wife's as well. It was the same under Bush. Division will always run rampant so-long as Information Technology continues to expand and hate-monger Commentators continue to rip on Presidents as fascists or Nazi's.

Yeah... in a free society, people will talk. That doesn't mean that the principle political players must engage in it themselves. But look who's referring to American citizens as "evil-mongers" and comparing them with Nazis. That'd be Reid and Pelosi... the leadership of our bicameral Congress. :eek:

It was Obama's job to set the tone in Washington. But right out of the box, he handed off to Nancy Pelosi on Porkulus. What he should have done was to privately give both her and Reid his expectation that the legislation be truly bipartisan, and let them know that if they brought him something that wasn't... he'd send it back. This would have been in keeping with the promises that he made on the trail and would have set an entirely different tone in Washington. It would have demonstrated a commitment to executive leadership, and thus, leadership of ALL citizens. Not just the half that agree with him.

He fucked up. And the only way he can fix it is to walk it back and start again. He could do that easily by addressing it as a "gridlock" issue that he's identified as a priority. But... he would have to actually mean it, and he'd have to follow through on it, treating ALL our representatives with an even hand.

He has causes a SERIOUS deficit of trust, and only a Solomon-like effort can save him. He can't afford to keep alienating half the citizens of this country. And if his efforts at bipartisanship are not honest... AND effective... he may as well resign and let Joe Biden finish his term. It'll all end up the same anyway if he doesn't pull his head out of his ass and engage in EXECUTIVE leadership. It's well-past time to leave the legislature behind, to the people whose job it still is be there.


85% of this post; though, is opinion. I happen to disagree with most of. So...........?
 
85% of this post; though, is opinion. I happen to disagree with most of. So...........?

That's what discussion boards are for, isn't it?... discussion? opinion? :eusa_eh:

Honestly, it suits me just fine to see the Democrat Party out of power and Obama limited to one term. The way he's going now, we'll give him a Republican Congress and he can either change his partisan ways or sit-and-spin for his last two years.

It's a shame though. We can ill-afford the waste of four years time, spent digging a deeper hole. Obama had all the tools he needed to be a success. But he chose to be an ideological extremist instead.
 
I think the Republican (minority, mind you), is actually taking an "our way or nothing" approach and so anything the Democrats wish to accomplish has to be partisan based on the precedent the R's are setting.
 
I think the Republican (minority, mind you), is actually taking an "our way or nothing" approach and so anything the Democrats wish to accomplish has to be partisan based on the precedent the R's are setting.

IOW, you believe the differences are not real and substantive, but merely political "obstructionism"??? ....that minorities have no rights to representation? :eusa_eh:
 
IOW, you believe the differences are not real and substantive, but merely political "obstructionism"??? ....that minorities have no rights to representation? :eusa_eh:

Of course they do, but if they aren't going to accept anything AT ALL unless it's theirs, then I don't see how the Democrats CAN BE bi-partisan short of just..........being Republicans.

Dems were the ones voted in, so that doesn't make much sense.
 
85% of this post; though, is opinion. I happen to disagree with most of. So...........?

That's what discussion boards are for, isn't it?... discussion? opinion? :eusa_eh:

Honestly, it suits me just fine to see the Democrat Party out of power and Obama limited to one term. The way he's going now, we'll give him a Republican Congress and he can either change his partisan ways or sit-and-spin for his last two years.

It's a shame though. We can ill-afford the waste of four years time, spent digging a deeper hole. Obama had all the tools he needed to be a success. But he chose to be an ideological extremist instead.


Your so right. Obama had the whole enchilada and blew it.

Can't say I'm sorry that his own Dems pretty much saboutaged him though. This healthcare bill is one giant clusterfuck and needs to be scraped.

If the Reps do take back enough seats in the House and Senate to make a difference Obama will have to really start governing. He will have to work with Reps and Dems alike.

I just wonder if he can put his ideology on the back burner or not???
 
Of course they do, but if they aren't going to accept anything AT ALL unless it's theirs, then I don't see how the Democrats CAN BE bi-partisan short of just..........being Republicans.

Dems were the ones voted in, so that doesn't make much sense.

There are limits to what Republicans can accept and still be Republicans. Nearly all the legislation, proposed by Democrats thus far, has been stuffed up with 'poison pills'.

This "healthcare summit" was all about feeding the "85% meme". That much was clear. But the fact is, that there are deal-breakers which CANNOT be overcome. And Obama KNEW that going in. It doesn't much matter if Mitch McConnell agrees that 'water is wet' if Obama's holding his head under 'until the bubbles stop'. :eek:

The areas where agreement could possibly have been found are undermined by the "comprehensive" approach because Democrats insist upon including their deal-breakers. We could agree that we need answers for citizens with "preexisting conditions", for example, but that agreement won't come when if it comes part and parcel with the acceptance of 'poison pills'.

You're right that Dems got voted in. But that doesn't mean it's incumbent upon every citizen in America to embrace the extreme left elements of their ideology. It's not a rational expectation in a country as diverse as our own.

I deserved a president just as much as you did. I deserved representation in Congress just as you do. But Obama is NOT my president; he's yours. The two senators from my state are NOT my senators; they're yours. In all things. All the time. And by their own choice.

Extreme partisanship cannot help but create division and resistance. It was Obama's JOB to set the tone, and to demonstrate executive leadership. Ultimately, it's his ass on the line because he'll be the one accountable in the end. But he doesn't seem to understand that bipartisanship was his responsibility and the duty that he owes to ALL of us.
He's not a legislator anymore who can afford to indulge his own ideological whims.
 
Only someone living under a sizeable rock for more than a year wouldn't know the campaign is over.

But last Thursday's made-for-TV shame was Obama's attempt to make good on his repeated campaign promises to keep the public informed on the health care debate by doing it in front of the C-span cameras, 100% transparency so everything would be open and above board for all to see. But he had clearly implied we would have had that opportunity during the many months when deals were being made behind closed doors, not in the 11th hour well after the wheeling and dealing had been done.

And it only took place because the heat had been turned up, reminding all of his C-span promises, so he had to do something to, hopefully, make it look like he was carrying out those promises. It was pure cover for him but more importantly for skittish Dims who have to face the voters in 8 short months now with the memories of the revolts of the MA, NJ, and VA elections still fresh in voters' minds.

I'm betting it's too little too late though. And Pelosi's plea yesterday for Dims to do the right thing and support this debacle even if it costs them their House/Senate seats is beyond laughable. It's desperation on steroids, but all it'll do is make them even bigger and fatter election targets. Lock 'n load!...
 
During the Health Care Reform Summit (a big waste of time and electricity) President Owe Bama, in another one of his displays of stupidity, told Senator McCain that the "Campaign is over." Well, if that is really true, why is it that Owe Bama seems to be on a campaign mission every time he speaks in public? He never speaks in a Presidential way but only in a way that makes you feel like he is running for office. Didn't anybody tell him he won the election and it's time to start acting like a President - which is another issue in itself. Am I the only one who feels like he is being "preached at" when he speaks and not "talked to" as a citizen should be?

And what is your definition of 'in a presidential way'?
 
I'd like to see President Obama stop acting like a President and actually govern. But then that would require him to repudiate his current idealology. I dont think it's likely.

His 'idealogy' is the same as it's been with most presidents since the beginning of the 20th century. And hey, we did pretty well in that century. What would cause you to think that governing would require him to give up his 'idealogy'?
 
p.s. Just to clarify as to why this isn't your garden-variety Mexican standoff...

Each party ostensibly has a baseline of core values that differentiates it from the other party. There's a finite limit to what can be tolerated or accepted by either party. Democrats are operating under the line. They've taken an extreme ideological position, that violates core Republican principles, and are attempting to ram it through.

You can't vote for "individual mandates" and legislation which controls every aspect of a private industry and still call yourself a Republican.

So... what exactly is it that Republicans are asking for which fatally violates core Democrat principles? :eusa_eh:
 
We just had a POTUS that talked to you wingnuts on your level (the rest of the country didn't have a clue as to what he was saying and practically everything he said had to be translated. I, for one, am glad that we have a POTUS who commands the language at an intellectual level. It surely makes him more easily understood than the previous one. Now, simply because some of you can't handle the language at an intellectual level is no reason for the POTUS to 'dumb himself down' since most of us don't have a problem understanding what he says even if we don't agree.
 
p.s. Just to clarify as to why this isn't your garden-variety Mexican standoff...

Each party ostensibly has a baseline of core values that differentiates it from the other party. There's a finite limit to what can be tolerated or accepted by either party. Democrats are operating under the line. They've taken an extreme ideological position, that violates core Republican principles, and are attempting to ram it through.

You can't vote for "individual mandates" and legislation which controls every aspect of a private industry and still call yourself a Republican.

So... what exactly is it that Republicans are asking for which fatally violates core Democrat principles? :eusa_eh:

And just what do you see as the 'extreme ideological' position take by democrats and what core Republican principles does this supposed 'extreme ideological' position violate?
 
Obama's Perpetual Campaign strategy is a FAIL... because campaigns, by nature, are divisive. In his CHOICE to engage in extreme partisanship, Obama can only lead on one side. He's their president; not ours.

It's not possible to play from one side of the field and still represent both sides. He CAUSES division, at a time when the country is better served by harmony.

All modern day POTUS spend a large degree of their time in office in 'campaign mode', expecially when they are trying to tackle 'contentious' problems. Reagan did it, Bush I did it, Clinton did it, and even Dubya did it. You want the POTUS to 'talk' to you and then you complain when he does it.
 
p.s. Just to clarify as to why this isn't your garden-variety Mexican standoff...

Each party ostensibly has a baseline of core values that differentiates it from the other party. There's a finite limit to what can be tolerated or accepted by either party. Democrats are operating under the line. They've taken an extreme ideological position, that violates core Republican principles, and are attempting to ram it through.

You can't vote for "individual mandates" and legislation which controls every aspect of a private industry and still call yourself a Republican.

So... what exactly is it that Republicans are asking for which fatally violates core Democrat principles? :eusa_eh:

And just what do you see as the 'extreme ideological' position take by democrats and what core Republican principles does this supposed 'extreme ideological' position violate?

Huh? I named two of them for starters in the above post. :eusa_eh:

There are more. I've got to get out of here for awhile, so I'll check back later. By then, maybe you can site an example or two of how proposed Republican legislation is violating your core principles.
 
All modern day POTUS spend a large degree of their time in office in 'campaign mode', expecially when they are trying to tackle 'contentious' problems. Reagan did it, Bush I did it, Clinton did it, and even Dubya did it. You want the POTUS to 'talk' to you and then you complain when he does it.

Hopefully, while I'm gone, you'll cite a few examples of this too... on par with Obama's website... and his PERSONAL LOGO. :lol:
 
Last edited:
The president was responding to McCain's comments in which he complained that the health care bill was not produced in the open, but "behind closed doors."

McCain complained of "unsavory" dealmaking to get the bill passed in the Senate, including promises to give special deals to residents of Louisiana, Nebraska and Florida. (Some of those provisions were removed in Mr. Obama's plan released Monday.)

He pointed to a number of issues, including the PhRMA deal and a provision mandating $100 million for a Connecticut hospital, asking "why should that happen?"

At one point, Mr. Obama tried to interject. "Can I just finish, please," McCain said, cutting off the president.

"People are angry," McCain said. "We promised them change in Washington, and what we got was a process that you and I both said we would change."

He called on Democrats to "go back to the beginning" and "remove all the special deals for the special interests and the favored few," adding that he favors a system in which "geography does not dictate what kind of health care."



A visibly annoyed Mr. Obama immediately responded, saying "we can spend the remainder of the time with our respective talking points going back and forth. We were supposed to be talking about insurance."

"We're not campaigning anymore," he told McCain. "The election's over."

(Quipped McCain, laughing: "I'm reminded of that every day.")
Obama to McCain: "The Election's Over" - Political Hotsheet - CBS News





:smoke:

http://reason.com/assets/mc/_ATTIC/Image/jsullum/obama_smoking.png
 
Last edited:
One must wonder how 'we're not campaigning anymore' is a response to a question about his lack of transparency.

Cultists defend it, though. Go figure.
 

Forum List

Back
Top