Obama Steps Up Confrontation

Xenophon

Gone and forgotten
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
16,705
Reaction score
3,927
Points
48
Location
In your head
The great divider, Barry just is a political gift that keeps on giving, if you are the opposition party.

Obama Takes More Aggressive Tack - WSJ.com

Mr. Obama campaigned on calling for an end to partisan bickering in Washington, but once in office he launched an ambitious agenda that pursued several long-held Democratic goals.

Meanwhile, Republicans decided at an early stage to aggressively oppose most of Mr. Obama's agenda. Partisan tensions have run high for most of his term.

Recently, Mr. Obama has been swinging particularly hard. He followed up his "go for it" taunt Thursday with the recess appointment of union lawyer Craig Becker to the National Labor Relations Board, adopting a tactic that presidents of both parties have used in recent decades to skirt the normal confirmation process. Mr. Becker's confirmation had been blocked in the Senate by a filibuster in February.

On Tuesday, Mr. Obama will sign what has been billed as a package of fixes to the health-care bill, approved under rules that required only a simple majority vote to pass in the Senate. That nullified Republicans' power to block it through a filibuster.

Democrats attached to the bill a major overhaul of student-lending laws, which eliminated a federal subsidy for private tuition lenders, federalized most student loans and plowed the savings into expanded federal higher education aid. Republicans say the bill will destroy the private student-lending market.

Mr. Alexander, the Tennessee Republican, called the student-loan move "really brazen" and "the most underreported, biggest Washington takeover in history."
So little time, and so much to repeal.
 

tigerbob

Increasingly jaded.
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
6,225
Reaction score
1,148
Points
153
Location
Michigan
I must confess I'm getting really tired of entirely unrelated pieces of policy being bolted together for the sake of political expediency.
 
OP
Xenophon

Xenophon

Gone and forgotten
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
16,705
Reaction score
3,927
Points
48
Location
In your head
I must confess I'm getting really tired of entirely unrelated pieces of policy being bolted together for the sake of political expediency.
Its called circumventing the system.
 
OP
Xenophon

Xenophon

Gone and forgotten
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
16,705
Reaction score
3,927
Points
48
Location
In your head
I must confess I'm getting really tired of entirely unrelated pieces of policy being bolted together for the sake of political expediency.
Its called circumventing the system.
Did the same thing happen often under previous presidents?
Not like this, sometimes you had fighting, but you never saw 100% partisan bills passed with things like reconcilliation.
The system is breaking down, its not supposed to be a tyranny of the majority, but the current gov has either forgotten this or is ignoring it.

The voters will decide which it is.
 

Samson

Póg Mo Thóin
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
27,332
Reaction score
4,227
Points
245
Location
A Higher Plain
OP
Xenophon

Xenophon

Gone and forgotten
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
16,705
Reaction score
3,927
Points
48
Location
In your head

tigerbob

Increasingly jaded.
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
6,225
Reaction score
1,148
Points
153
Location
Michigan

Samson

Póg Mo Thóin
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
27,332
Reaction score
4,227
Points
245
Location
A Higher Plain
A line item veto is immpossible, it violates teh US Constitution.

A president can even sign in a bill he is given or veto it, he cannot select what he likes and dislikes.
My bad. I misread Samson's post. Thanks for clearing my head!
The line item veto would need to be amended to the constitution.

Unlikely the Executive will ever be given this power.

My point is that parlimentary processes being what they are, require some "give and take" between representatives that would be impossible without "unrelated pieces of policy being bolted together for the sake of political expediency."
 

del

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
52,099
Reaction score
10,832
Points
2,030
Location
on a one way cul-de-sac
A line item veto is immpossible, it violates teh US Constitution.

A president can even sign in a bill he is given or veto it, he cannot select what he likes and dislikes.
My bad. I misread Samson's post. Thanks for clearing my head!
The line item veto would need to be amended to the constitution.

Unlikely the Executive will ever be given this power.

My point is that parlimentary processes being what they are, require some "give and take" between representatives that would be impossible without "unrelated pieces of policy being bolted together for the sake of political expediency."
perhaps, but should this be the norm?

i think not.
 

masquerade

positivity
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
4,508
Reaction score
1,465
Points
48
Location
right of center
The great divider, Barry just is a political gift that keeps on giving, if you are the opposition party.

Obama Takes More Aggressive Tack - WSJ.com

Democrats attached to the bill a major overhaul of student-lending laws, which eliminated a federal subsidy for private tuition lenders, federalized most student loans and plowed the savings into expanded federal higher education aid. Republicans say the bill will destroy the private student-lending market.

Mr. Alexander, the Tennessee Republican, called the student-loan move "really brazen" and "the most underreported, biggest Washington takeover in history."
So little time, and so much to repeal.
Exactly what I said in a post a couple of weeks ago.
The outcome: The goverment will decide who gets a loan and who doesn't. Sure, your GPA might be one of the highest in your class, but this minority over here ... well he/she has a much lower GPA, but we're going to give him/her the loan instead.

The government is growing in size and power while the private sector shrinks away. What a sad state of affairs this country is in.
 

Ravi

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2008
Messages
90,898
Reaction score
13,984
Points
2,205
Location
Hating Hatters

tigerbob

Increasingly jaded.
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Messages
6,225
Reaction score
1,148
Points
153
Location
Michigan
A line item veto is immpossible, it violates teh US Constitution.

A president can even sign in a bill he is given or veto it, he cannot select what he likes and dislikes.
My bad. I misread Samson's post. Thanks for clearing my head!
The line item veto would need to be amended to the constitution.

Unlikely the Executive will ever be given this power.

My point is that parlimentary processes being what they are, require some "give and take" between representatives that would be impossible without "unrelated pieces of policy being bolted together for the sake of political expediency."
I understand the rationale, but I still have huge misgivings about the way in which this is open to misuse.
 

Samson

Póg Mo Thóin
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
27,332
Reaction score
4,227
Points
245
Location
A Higher Plain
My bad. I misread Samson's post. Thanks for clearing my head!
The line item veto would need to be amended to the constitution.

Unlikely the Executive will ever be given this power.

My point is that parlimentary processes being what they are, require some "give and take" between representatives that would be impossible without "unrelated pieces of policy being bolted together for the sake of political expediency."
I understand the rationale, but I still have huge misgivings about the way in which this is open to misuse.
So do I.

But what are you gonna do?

We'll here's my solution: Localized Democracy.

I really don't think representative democracy can work once the population reaches 300 million +, and only 50% of them vote, and then there's a question about vote-count, registration, etc., etc.
 

Care4all

Warrior Princess
Joined
Mar 24, 2007
Messages
54,962
Reaction score
13,555
Points
2,220
Location
Maine
Its called circumventing the system.
Did the same thing happen often under previous presidents?
Not like this, sometimes you had fighting, but you never saw 100% partisan bills passed with things like reconcilliation.
The system is breaking down, its not supposed to be a tyranny of the majority, but the current gov has either forgotten this or is ignoring it.

The voters will decide which it is.
simply put, what you are saying, is NOT TRUE....

and THIS shows your flawed thinking on matters imo xeno.

BOTH SIDES have done things like this, to the SAME DEPTH.....me thinks you need to take those rosey colored glasses off, and see the truth about republicans in congress and the DEPTH OF WHAT THEY HAVE DONE previously, when they had the majority....

no knowledgeable person on politics could honestly make that statement of yours....

your ''side'' that you choose to honor, is as slimy as the rest of the bunch!

this is why i think arguing about these measures is fruitless....and yes, sad at that! :(

care
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top