Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Obama: Doubling Down on Incompetence

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Sam View Post
    No, that was my original point. Given that the make-up of the 2012 election was more representative of American demographics than the 2014 election, it's very hard to turn this into a "referendum election." Maybe it's a referendum from the over-60 white male demographic, though . . .
    Oh, it's a referendum all right. I'm pretty sure everyone who was eligible to vote could have done so given the opportunity. Those who supported Republican policies were motivated to show up at the polls. Those who supported Obama, not so much.
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
    sigpic
    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by lao tzu View Post
      Umm, dude, somehow missed who's still in the White House?



      Y'all do it to yourselves. Srsly.
      I'm assuming that you do understand that Obama wasn't up for election this year. I say this because someone I work with actually said "well at least Obama won." She also thought that Obama would be re-elected in two years despite patient efforts to explain that he wasn't eligible.

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
        And the exact reverse was true in 2006 when the Republicans tried to distance themselves from an increasingly unpopular president while the Democrats ran against Bush and his policies and tried to portray their opponents as rubber stamps for Bush.

        And what did you expect from the Republicans when Obama made it crystal clear that he did not need to or want to talk to them. He said it was useless because they were too extreme while simultaneously offering to open up talks with America's enemies (obviously because they were more reasonable than the Republicans).

        About the only time he did talk to them it was to deliver a sneering lecture about how he won and elections have consequences. Obama and the Democrats in the House and Senate refused to consider a single Republican proposal during the first two years. And after the Republican landslide in 2010 Obama had to ask his aides if they knew how to contact the incoming Republican leadership because he never talked to them before. Bob Woodward detailed a lot of this in his book.

        And yet after this you act like you expected the Republicans to come in on bended knee begging for an opportunity to help Obama push through his agenda. In fact many in the press complained about just that. They were outraged that they weren't bending over backwards to help "fix" Obamacare -- legislation that not a single one of them supported and campaigned on a promise of working to repeal it.
        That's just a bizarre rewriting of history. Obama tried to get Republicans onboard with the stimulus, with the auto bailout — he spent months trying to court moderate Republicans like Snowe on the ACA, he had a public group discussion with Republicans on the ACA, he spent more months in talks with Senate and House Republicans on the Grand Bargain, nearly sealing a deal with Bohener. McConnell's strategy was, from the start, a unified front of "No."

        The idea that Obama hasn't tried, desperately at times, to work with Republicans is an echo-chamber myth.
        "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
          Oh, it's a referendum all right. I'm pretty sure everyone who was eligible to vote could have done so given the opportunity. Those who supported Republican policies were motivated to show up at the polls. Those who supported Obama, not so much.
          That's essentially saying that every election is a "referendum election." Sort of loses its meaning. It's notable that majorities of the public still support policies that the GOP is dead-set against (keeping Obamacare, increasing minimum wage, path-to-citizenship immigration reform, etc.)

          If it's a referendum election, you have a very confused electorate.
          "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Sam View Post
            That's essentially saying that every election is a "referendum election." Sort of loses its meaning.
            Every (fair) election IS a referendum.
            It's notable that majorities of the public still support policies that the GOP is dead-set against (keeping Obamacare, increasing minimum wage, path-to-citizenship immigration reform, etc.)

            If it's a referendum election, you have a very confused electorate.
            No, just an electorate that doesn't support Obama's policies as much as you think it does. Polls (and polloganda) are one thing; elections are another.
            Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

            Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
            sigpic
            I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
              Every (fair) election IS a referendum.

              No, just an electorate that doesn't support Obama's policies as much as you think it does. Polls (and polloganda) are one thing; elections are another.
              Can we assume that if the referendum isn't to our liking that it was unfair?

              It's -much- more reliable to get an understanding of what people want through -asking them- than through inferring the same thing through a particular election. You've got a president who is only the second president since WWII to be elected with over 51% of the popular vote twice yet whose party has been "shellacked" in both midterm elections. Trying to draw a referendum or mandate from the lowest turnout election of the four is an exercise in bias confirmation.
              "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Sam View Post
                That's just a bizarre rewriting of history. Obama tried to get Republicans onboard with the stimulus, with the auto bailout — he spent months trying to court moderate Republicans like Snowe on the ACA, he had a public group discussion with Republicans on the ACA, he spent more months in talks with Senate and House Republicans on the Grand Bargain, nearly sealing a deal with Bohener. McConnell's strategy was, from the start, a unified front of "No."

                The idea that Obama hasn't tried, desperately at times, to work with Republicans is an echo-chamber myth.
                So Bob Woodward is now part of the Republican "echo chamber" He must be part of that "vast right wing conspiracy"

                I suggest you read "The Price of Politics" where he documents how Obama haughtily told Eric Cantor "Look at the polls. The polls are pretty good for me right now. Elections have consequences. And Eric, I won." when Cantor offered to negotiate on the stimulus package. Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in his usual cordial manner put it another way: "We have the votes. F-word them."

                That was how "Obama tried to get Republicans onboard with the stimulus" spending "months trying to court moderate Republicans." He sneered at their offers and slapped them down.

                During the "debt crisis" a few years ago John Boehner was very public about constantly being called to the White House not to negotiate but to be lectured to. Even the Democrats were complaining of Obama's ham-fisted attempts to boss everyone around with one of their senior staffers saying that he "simply didn't understand how Congress works and didn't know how to negotiate."

                Woodward reports that both Pelosi and Reid got so fed up with Obama's handling of the situation that they cut their own deal with Boehner saying that Obama had been "voted off the island in his own house."

                When hyper partisans like Pelosi and Reid get disillusioned with you and start working with the Republicans behind your back that speaks volumes.

                But Obama did negotiate one thing only to screw it up. Woodward details how after originally agreeing to focus on spending cuts Obama had actually got Boehner to agree to a major concession -- to an increase of $800 billion in tax increases. But then after coming to an accord, Obama turned around and demanded an additional $400 billion -- something he had to be aware that Boehner couldn't pull off -- and pretty much took spending cuts off the table.

                IMHO, Obama decided to deliberately sabotage it because having a political issue in the upcoming 2012 election was more valuable than fixing the crisis. That is pretty much a major theme in Woodward's "The Price of Politics" -- how Obama didn't really want a deal because of the election.

                To be fair he put a lot of the blame on Boehner as well but clearly revealed rather than being the Republicans as the White House claimed and the media dutifully parroted it was the Obama Administration's idea to postpone national debt ceilings until after the election.
                Last edited by rogue06; 11-06-2014, 12:44 AM.

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                  So Bob Woodward is no part of the Republican "echo chamber" He must be part of that "vast right wing conspiracy"

                  I suggest you read "The Price of Politics" where he documents how he told Eric Cantor "Look at the polls. The polls are pretty good for me right now. Elections have consequences. And Eric, I won." when Cantor offered to negotiate on the stimulus package. Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in his usual cordial manner put it another way: "We have the votes. F-word them."

                  That was how "Obama tried to get Republicans onboard with the stimulus" spending "months trying to court moderate Republicans." He sneered at their offers and slapped them down.

                  During the "debt crisis" a few years ago John Boehner was very public about constantly being called to the White House not to negotiate but to be lectured to. Even the Democrats were complaining of Obama's ham-fisted attempts to boss everyone around with one of their senior staffers saying that he "simply didn't understand how Congress works and didn't know how to negotiate."

                  Woodward reports that both Pelosi and Reid got so fed up with Obama's handling of the situation that they cut their own deal with Boehner saying that Obama had been "voted off the island in his own house."

                  When hyper partisans like Pelosi and Reid get disillusioned with you and start working with the Republicans behind your back that speaks volumes.

                  But Obama did negotiate one thing only to screw it up. Woodward details how after originally agreeing to focus on spending cuts Obama had actually got Boehner to agree to a major concession -- to an increase of $800 billion in tax increases. But then after coming to an accord, Obama turned around and demanded an additional $400 billion -- something he had to be aware that Boehner couldn't pull off -- and pretty much took spending cuts off the table.

                  IMHO, Obama decided to deliberately sabotage it because having a political issue in the upcoming 2012 election was more valuable than fixing the crisis. That is pretty much a major theme in Woodward's "The Price of Politics" -- how Obama didn't really want a deal because of the election.

                  To be fair he put a lot of the blame on Boehner as well but clearly revealed rather than being the Republicans as the White House claimed and the media dutifully parroted it was the Obama Administration's idea to postpone national debt ceilings until after the election.
                  Bob Woodward definitely went off the rails a bit; I remember mentioning on OldTWeb how Woodward made a claim about Obama not wanting to replace the sequester in 2012, even though Obama had very clearly stated the sequester needed to be replaced multiple times and that statement was indeed on the White House press briefing the day the sequester deal was announced.

                  The negotiations between Boehner and Obama have been pretty thoroughly documented. Again, it's just plain nuts to insist that all Obama could do was yell. And Woodward was wrong again on who killed the Grand Bargain — Cantor admitted that he and Paul Ryan scuttled it!

                  Source: Eric Cantor, the Sequester, and the Death of the Grand Bargain. Ryan Lizza. The New Yorker. 2013.02.

                  LIZZA: There’s sort of a final meeting with Paul Ryan and you and Boehner where it seems like there’s a final sort of discussion about whether this offer needs to be rejected or not. The way it seems to be reported is—it seems like Boehner wanted to do it, you and Ryan sort of talked him out of it. Is that—

                  CANTOR: I would say it’s a fair assessment, because, in the end, we felt that—well, let me back up, this is probably a longer answer. Yes, it’s probably an accurate conclusion.

                  My question was imprecise; there were actually two sets of discussions, which I lumped together. There was a meeting on July 20th, with just Cantor, Paul Ryan, and Kevin McCarthy, the House Majority Whip, at which the three men discussed their objections to the White House asking for $1.2 trillion in revenue rather than $800 billion, and their concern that Boehner might go along with such a plan. And on the following day, July 21st, Obama formally proposed a deal to Boehner that included the $1.2 trillion in new revenue that so concerned Boehner’s three Republican colleagues. Boehner then had the crucial conversation with Cantor in which he explained the details of the proposal.


                  But it’s clear from our exchange that Cantor agreed with the premise of my question: “Boehner wanted to do it”—accept Obama’s $1.2 trillion offer—and Cantor “talked him out of it.” Though, interestingly, Cantor also suggested that Paul Ryan deserves some of the credit.

                  © Copyright Original Source



                  And Obama never took spending cuts off the table! There were still something like $3 trillion on the spending cut side! This is fantastic historical fantasy but it's nothing close to accurate. Cantor freely admitted that he and Ryan scuttled the Grand Bargain, Obama immediately had said that the extra $400 billion was an offer but wasn't necessary for the Bargain, only to be forevermore rebuffed by Boehner, and Woodward would later make claims completely contradictory to historical evidence.
                  "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Sam View Post
                    Bob Woodward definitely went off the rails a bit
                    Funny how that only happened when he writes an exposé about the Obama Administration

                    Until then the left has assured us he was a virtual font of truth and the epitome of journalistic integrity. And I'm sure if the Republicans gain control of the presidency in 2016 and he writes another book about what is going on in the White House he will suddenly be regarded in that way again.

                    I'm always still in trouble again

                    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      For me, it was the way the ACA was handled. It was clear even the President didn't understand the consequences of the act. Or perhaps he didn't think things through. Maybe he didn't care. I don't know. But he showed very badly on that.
                      Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                        Funny how that only happened when he writes an exposé about the Obama Administration

                        Until then the left has assured us he was a virtual font of truth and the epitome of journalistic integrity. And I'm sure if the Republicans gain control of the presidency in 2016 and he writes another book about what is going on in the White House he will suddenly be regarded in that way again.
                        Sorry, man, but the bias of Bob Woodward has been well-chronicled the past few years. His conclusions are not at all correlative with even his own stenography. Woodward has a fairly clear animus against Obama, seemingly for his unwillingness or inability to be Washington DC's Green Lantern, and the facts show it. That he's claiming something about Obama's deal with Bohener and Cantor that Eric Cantor himself contradicts should be a bit of a signal to you that a bias has taken over Woodward's pen.

                        You have to deal with the evidence relating to the charges and the evidence in no way supports Woodward's claims about the death of the Grand Bargain.

                        George Will used to be a decent political commentator. Now he's ranting about climate change and how the science of how Ebola spreads isn't settled. Getting older makes people less competent sometimes.
                        "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Sam View Post
                          Because Republicans were trying to nationalize the 2014 elections and Democrats were trying to localize them.
                          Quick, somebody call the police!

                          Obviously, trying to run from a politician who is still much more popular with the coalition than Congress wasn't such a hot idea.
                          News Flash, Sam --- -Congress is NEVER popular. But that's your reason for his own party running from him?
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
                            For me, it was the way the ACA was handled. It was clear even the President didn't understand the consequences of the act. Or perhaps he didn't think things through. Maybe he didn't care. I don't know. But he showed very badly on that.
                            He didn't give a flyin' flip, and his "I tried reaching out" is crap only people like Sam believe.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by lao tzu View Post
                              Hee hee. Y'all just can't get over the fact he won two elections, can you?
                              Well yes, when 41% of the population do not know who the VP is, it is no wonder.
                              Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Does anybody remember this from Obama's "Hope and Change"?

                                To reduce bills rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them, Obama "will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days."


                                "When there’s a bill that ends up on my desk as president, you the public will have five days to look online and find out what’s in it before I sign it, so that you know what your government’s doing.”

                                As opposed to....



                                White House Changes the Terms of a Campaign Pledge About Posting Bills Online

                                Source: NYTimes

                                During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama promised that once a bill was passed by Congress, the White House would post it online for five days before he signed it.

                                “When there’s a bill that ends up on my desk as president, you the public will have five days to look online and find out what’s in it before I sign it, so that you know what your government’s doing,” Mr. Obama said as a candidate, telling voters he would make government more transparent and accountable.

                                When he took office in January, his team added that in posting nonemergency bills, it would “allow the public to review and comment” before Mr. Obama signed them.

                                Five months into his administration, Mr. Obama has signed two dozen bills, but he has almost never waited five days. On the recent credit card legislation, which included a controversial measure to allow guns in national parks, he waited just two.

                                Various watchdog groups have slapped Mr. Obama’s wrist for repeatedly failing to live up to the pledge. Politifact.com, the fact-checking arm of The St. Petersburg Times, has branded it a “promise broken.”

                                © Copyright Original Source




                                About 1 minute into the video is the lie about putting bills on the internet for 5 days before he signs them so you can see what's in them.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                163 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                383 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X