• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Shift on Executive Power Lets Obama Bypass Rivals

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
The Republicans are basing their objections to bad legislation on what is good for the country. That is why they keep filibustering bad legislation by the Democrats. They're doing it for the good of the country.
And when the Republicans put forth legislation, the Democrats oppose because they feel that it is bad for the country.

Each feels they are right can can point out flaws in the other.

As long as they feel they have to put the party line ahead of common sense; stagnation and stalemates will occur.

Neither side is willing to expose their jugular by sitting down with the other to come up with something that is workable.

1) Their own side will consider them to be a traitor by giving in to the other or sacrificing their ideals.
2) Someone on the other side will in some way use the exposure to back stab due to ideology.
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,439
1
81
No one should be in favor of unilateral power in the executive office, regardless of who is wielding it. We have a president, not a dictator.

That said, no one should be in favor of the obstructionist tactics employed by the Republican Party over the past decade either. The utter lack of anything resembling compromise on behalf of GoP congress members has been truly disgusting to watch, and poses just as great a threat to our union as abuses of the executive orders by Bush or Obama.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,816
3,622
126
Democrats always claim that the reason they filibustered legislation by Bush was the good of the country, why wouldn't the opposite be true? Unless of course it's just partisan bullshit on both sides?
Now you partisan Democrats can go "wah wah wah false equivalence! ebil repugs did it more often!"
That is not the issue. Saying you will do anything to keep the president from being re-elected is saying that what you do you do regardless of whether it's good for the country. You don't say this if what you are doing is always for the good of the country. You don't have to announce a motive if your real motive is doing what's good for the country. That would go without saying. Mitch's words were treason. Job one, prevent re-election. The President also does whatever is good for the country. He didn't say his job one was to stop the Republicans from being re-elected. Had he done so you hypocrites would have a cow.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
16,666
4,512
136
No one should be in favor of unilateral power in the executive office, regardless of who is wielding it. We have a president, not a dictator.

That said, no one should be in favor of the obstructionist tactics employed by the Republican Party over the past decade either. The utter lack of anything resembling compromise on behalf of GoP congress members has been truly disgusting to watch, and poses just as great a threat to our union as abuses of the executive orders by Bush or Obama.
Grover Norquist won't allow the Republicons to compromise.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,816
3,622
126
No one should be in favor of unilateral power in the executive office, regardless of who is wielding it. We have a president, not a dictator.

That said, no one should be in favor of the obstructionist tactics employed by the Republican Party over the past decade either. The utter lack of anything resembling compromise on behalf of GoP congress members has been truly disgusting to watch, and poses just as great a threat to our union as abuses of the executive orders by Bush or Obama.
Note which came first and which came second. You can't claim abuse of power when that power is used to counter a threat to the nation which you have just admitted exists, an obstructionist congress. The President is duty bound to take action. He should be impeached if he doesn't. Psychopaths are in control of the house and blocking work in the Senate.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
10,911
1,063
126
The Republicans are basing their objections to bad legislation on what is good for the country. That is why they keep filibustering bad legislation by the Democrats. They're doing it for the good of the country.
Democrats always claim that the reason they filibustered legislation by Bush was the good of the country, why wouldn't the opposite be true? Unless of course it's just partisan bullshit on both sides?
Now you partisan Democrats can go "wah wah wah false equivalence! ebil repugs did it more often!"
You also realize that in the approximately 3 years the GOP has been the minority in the Senate under Obama that they've used the filibuster more any other 3 years combined in the history of the US. More than any other 5 years combined. It's one thing to filibuster extreme things that you disagree with, but this has gotten beyond excessive. The GOP has admitted that they intend to let nothing happen to hurt Obama's chances of re-election. That's not governing, that's being childish and holding the country hostage.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,816
3,622
126
Grover Norquist won't allow the Republicons to compromise.
The President should order his assets seized, his citizenship stripped and him deported. Time for folk to face consequences for irresponsible and Anti-American activity. It's the conservative way. Taking an oath to anthing but the Constitution or officially empowered US body for an elected official should be deemed an act of treason
 
Last edited:

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,816
3,622
126
You also realize that in the approximately 3 years the GOP has been the minority in the Senate under Obama that they've used the filibuster more any other 3 years combined in the history of the US. More than any other 5 years combined. It's one thing to filibuster extreme things that you disagree with, but this has gotten beyond excessive. The GOP has admitted that they intend to let nothing happen to hurt Obama's chances of re-election. That's not governing, that's being childish and holding the country hostage.
They are committing treason.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,468
389
121
The President should order his assets seized, his citizenship stripped and him deported. Time for folk to face consequences for irresponsible and Anti-American activity. It's the conservative way.
And I always thought you were a compassionate liberal...go figure. ;)
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
10,911
1,063
126
The President should order his assets seized, his citizenship stripped and him deported. Time for folk to face consequences for irresponsible and Anti-American activity. It's the conservative way.
I dislike Norquist too. He's a tool. However this is a bit extreme. Last I checked being a stupid asshole wasn't treason.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
And when the Republicans put forth legislation, the Democrats oppose because they feel that it is bad for the country.

Each feels they are right can can point out flaws in the other.

As long as they feel they have to put the party line ahead of common sense; stagnation and stalemates will occur.

Neither side is willing to expose their jugular by sitting down with the other to come up with something that is workable.

1) Their own side will consider them to be a traitor by giving in to the other or sacrificing their ideals.
2) Someone on the other side will in some way use the exposure to back stab due to ideology.
Well i'd like to see small, tightly focused bills designed to solve a single problem instead of huge omnibus bills that carry sweeping changes and mask hundreds, if not thousands of pork barrel special interest gifts to contributors. In the absence of good legislation i'd rather see no legislation at all.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,816
3,622
126
And I always thought you were a compassionate liberal...go figure. ;)
Nope, I'm a righteous raging conservative when somebody fucks with my country. It's like they poured alcohol on my brain. And I look so much like them I can get right in there close and cut them down.

The Jew goes for an eye for and eye and the Christian for forgiveness, but us Muslims believe is something different. When we come under attack we destroy without mercy or compromise right up to the moment when the enemy surrenders and repents. Then and only then, do we practice with the Christian. This and only this keeps the wolf and the sheep within us happy.

To extract an eye from the repentant is evil as it is evil to allow evil to exist because it is forgiven. The proper way is to destroy evil when evil is done and to forgive when evil repents. Only in this way is there justice in my opinion.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,816
3,622
126
I dislike Norquist too. He's a tool. However this is a bit extreme. Last I checked being a stupid asshole wasn't treason.
He's not a stupid asshole. He's an extortionist who applies his trade to US politicians. He is a traitor to democracy obtaining an oath that is country to the will and the good of the American people. He should have no more than one vote like the rest of us. He has extorted from every???? Republican that they will vote his will or they will lose their office and be replaces by some other piece of scum who will.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
You also realize that in the approximately 3 years the GOP has been the minority in the Senate under Obama that they've used the filibuster more any other 3 years combined in the history of the US. More than any other 5 years combined. It's one thing to filibuster extreme things that you disagree with, but this has gotten beyond excessive. The GOP has admitted that they intend to let nothing happen to hurt Obama's chances of re-election. That's not governing, that's being childish and holding the country hostage.
The day after the '08 elections, the Dem leadership stated that that were in control and did not need the Republicans for anything.

They apparently got their wish and now are complaining that it is the Republicans fault that they are in this mess.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
71,411
21,327
136
The day after the '08 elections, the Dem leadership stated that that were in control and did not need the Republicans for anything.

They apparently got their wish and now are complaining that it is the Republicans fault that they are in this mess.
That's a new feat of absurd thinking. Even if the Democrats said exactly that, which I have no memory of, and it wouldn't even make sense as they didn't have 60 Senate votes, you're trying to say that the Democrats can't blame the Republicans for their behavior over 3 years because someone said something mean.

That's easily one of the stupidest things I've ever read on here. I feel like I've said that a lot recently, but the bar keeps getting lowered.
 

nyker96

Diamond Member
Apr 19, 2005
5,631
1
81
I personally don't think this is a good idea. Even know I support Obama, I think he needs to respect constitution limits. Like what Bush did back then is just overstepping executive power. It's not a good idea to do this to further your agenda. This of course is my personal opinion.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
Eric Cantor went to the White house on day three of President Obama's presidency. At the time, Obama and Democrats had total control of the White House, Senate and House. Cantor tried to share ideas with President Obama for stimulating the economy and creating jobs. When Cantor pushed for small business tax-cuts, President Obama said,

"Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won."
I sure remember this clearly.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,816
3,622
126
I personally don't think this is a good idea. Even know I support Obama, I think he needs to respect constitution limits. Like what Bush did back then is just overstepping executive power. It's not a good idea to do this to further your agenda. This of course is my personal opinion.
You said personal opinion twice. Good grief! I like your opinion and I like even more that you doubly know what it is.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
The day after the '08 elections, the Dem leadership stated that that were in control and did not need the Republicans for anything.

They apparently got their wish and now are complaining that it is the Republicans fault that they are in this mess.
That's a new feat of absurd thinking. Even if the Democrats said exactly that, which I have no memory of, and it wouldn't even make sense as they didn't have 60 Senate votes, you're trying to say that the Democrats can't blame the Republicans for their behavior over 3 years because someone said something mean.

That's easily one of the stupidest things I've ever read on here. I feel like I've said that a lot recently, but the bar keeps getting lowered.
Those were statements made by the Pelosi camp and echoed by Reed as soon as the House and Presidential results were known.

The implication was that they had the votes to run roughshod over any Republican opposition.

It was reported by the media - how accurate who knows; it was widely reported at the time and it lit a fire under the Republicans.

Since then it has become a focal point for both sides - those trying to slow down Obama, those that feel that they have to do without the Republicans and those that blame the Dems for not doing anything when they had the chance
 
Last edited:

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,816
3,622
126
The hilarious thing about Republicans is that all they have to do to destroy Democrats is get out of the way and let them take us over the socialist cliff into disaster. It would be the end of the Democratic party, no, all those insane socialist policies in place and the End Time just around the corner.

But of course if that happened the Republicans would never win a single seat ever again.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
71,411
21,327
136
Those were statements made by the Pelosi camp and echoed by Reed as soon as the House and Presidential results were known.

The implication was that they had the votes to run roughshod over any Republican opposition.

It was reported by the media - how accurate who knows; it was widely reported at the time and it lit a fire under the Republicans.

Since then it has become a focal point for both sides - those trying to slow down Obama, those that feel that they have to do without the Republicans and those that blame the Dems for not doing anything when they had the chance
Please provide links to these statements.

Even if they were exactly as you describe however, that is hardly an excuse for the Republicans' complete abdication of responsibility over the last 3 years.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
71,411
21,327
136
I sure remember this clearly.
And what is wrong with that? Cantor was trying to push an utterly foolish stimulus package that was basically entirely tax cuts that have limited stimulative effect. Regardless of the political merits, it was dumb economic policy. When he tried to push it on Obama, he was told (correctly) that his plan wouldn't be going into place.

What Obama DID do however is craft a stimulus bill that was about 40% tax cuts. It was met with nearly unanimous Republican opposition. Shocking.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS