|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Oct 2, 2010 11:18:26 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Oct 2, 2010 14:36:12 GMT -8
I hope not. His trying to get GOP votes is what got him in this mess he is in now. He should have taken his voter mandate and shoved it up the GOP's ass. He should have tried to channel Harry Truman and given them hell.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdtosf on Oct 2, 2010 15:05:04 GMT -8
GOP will do what ever they can to make sure Obama and the USA fail.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 2, 2010 15:24:20 GMT -8
GOP will do what ever they can to make sure Obama and the USA fail. You got one out of two right. Obama is going to fail at his agenda for th goood of the country. Aztec70 came closer to what I would say. Just I would reverse the charges. It would not be good my way either. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 2, 2010 16:14:33 GMT -8
I hope not. His trying to get GOP votes is what got him in this mess he is in now. He should have taken his voter mandate and shoved it up the GOP's ass. He should have tried to channel Harry Truman and given them hell. You are exactly right. The Republicans are like the old USSR. They understand only power and the ruthless application of it. Obama should have taken it to them. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Oct 2, 2010 16:25:57 GMT -8
I hope not. His trying to get GOP votes is what got him in this mess he is in now. He should have taken his voter mandate and shoved it up the GOP's ass. He should have tried to channel Harry Truman and given them hell. You are exactly right. The Republicans are like the old USSR. They understand only power and the ruthless application of it. Obama should have taken it to them. Are you guys suggesting he no longer has a "mandate"? If he doesn't, I wonder why that is.... I'd love to see him try to "take it to them" now. Bring it on. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 2, 2010 16:49:37 GMT -8
You are exactly right. The Republicans are like the old USSR. They understand only power and the ruthless application of it. Obama should have taken it to them. Are you guys suggesting he no longer has a "mandate"? If he doesn't, I wonder why that is.... I'd love to see him try to "take it to them" now. Bring it on. As far as I am concerned he does, because the alternative party is peopled with some very low caliber people this year. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 2, 2010 17:42:58 GMT -8
As far as I am concerned he does, because the alternative party is peopled with some very low caliber people this year. Politics is the art of compromise, but I can not see any possibility of compromise with the Republicans. They are just greedy and satanically evil and have no love for their fellow man. The Republicans just want to enslave the poorer people. They have this concept that Conservatives are Better Than the Liberals, because the Liberals need government help to get by. We would Remove that Republican attitude of greed if we capped incomes at Fifty Thousand Max with any excess forfeited to the US Treasury. I dislike Greedy Snobby People. The world can do without them. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 2, 2010 18:01:47 GMT -8
As far as I am concerned he does, because the alternative party is peopled with some very low caliber people this year. Politics is the art of compromise, but I can not see any possibility of compromise with the Republicans. They are just greedy and satanically evil and have no love for their fellow man. The Republicans just want to enslave the poorer people. They have this concept that Conservatives are Better Than the Liberals, because the Liberals need government help to get by. We would Remove that Republican attitude of greed if we capped incomes at Fifty Thousand Max with any excess forfeited to the US Treasury. I dislike Greedy Snobby People. The world can do without them. The trick is the right mix of incentive and regard for the less well to do. The debate will probably continue for as long as we exist. The Republicans have their share of greedy, snobby people that is a fact. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Oct 2, 2010 21:07:03 GMT -8
Here's the problem with the arguments suggested by the pro-Obama posters. Obama and his congressional cohorts really did shove things down the GOP's throat. There was no serious attempt, as the article makes clear, to consider seriously any Republican ideas. Most Republicans these days are quite conservative, but there are still a few, especially in the Senate, who are more moderate. The fact that there were NO Rep. votes (thinking especially of the health insurance law) in favor the Dem. bill tells you something. And, let's not forget, the public has stayed solidly opposed to both ObamaCare and the bailouts. Obama is in trouble because he would not do ANYTHING to lure at least a few Republicans to support his proposals. Oh, yes, I should say the proposals of the very far left Democrats who have controlled Congress for the past four years. I seriously doubt that Obama knows what the hell is in the ObamaCare law. Do you really think he read all of it before he signed it? I'll tell you what; let's see how the mid-terms work out. If the Republicans gain only 20-30 House seats, I will conclude that the anti-Obama/Democrat trend was just a fallacy (since the party in power always loses about that many). If the GOP picks up about 40-49 seats, I will conclude that Obama has been largely rejected. If the GOP picks up 50, 60, or even more seats, I will conclude that Obama has been thoroughly rejected by the American people. If the last of those scenarios comes true, it will be tough for Democrats to make excuses. Notice how Obama and the Dems frame the issues. If the Republicans do not fall in line and uncritically support any and all Democratic proposals, they are labeled the Party of No. How would that differ from the stance taken by the Democrats when Bush was President? Did the Democrats just salute and say, "Yes, Sir!"? Sure they did.  Again, it did not have to be this way. Obama, who was supposed to be a new kind of unifying, post-partisan President, has acted as an ordinary bare-knuckles, ward-healing Chicago pol. He never stops campaigning. And he never stops treating those who hold a political view opposite his own as anything other than villains not worthy of respect. The American people have seen this and have drawn the appropriate conclusion. But, as I said, we will know more about all this after the election rersults are in. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 2, 2010 21:20:52 GMT -8
When I find myself in times of trouble, mother Mary comes to me,
speaking words of wisdom, let it be.
And in my hour of darkness she is standing right in front of me,
speaking words of wisdom, let it be.
Let it be, let it be, let it be, let it be.
Whisper words of wisdom, let it be.
And when the broken hearted people living in the world agree,
there will be an answer, let it be.
For though they may be parted there is still a chance that they will see,
there will be an answer. let it be.
Let it be, let it be, .....
And when the night is cloudy, there is still a light, that shines on me,
shine until tomorrow, let it be.
I wake up to the sound of music, mother Mary comes to me,
speaking words of wisdom, let it be.
Let it be, let it be, .....
|
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Oct 2, 2010 22:23:14 GMT -8
Here's the problem with the arguments suggested by the pro-Obama posters. Obama and his congressional cohorts really did shove things down the GOP's throat. There was no serious attempt, as the article makes clear, to consider seriously any Republican ideas. Most Republicans these days are quite conservative, but there are still a few, especially in the Senate, who are more moderate. The fact that there were NO Rep. votes (thinking especially of the health insurance law) in favor the Dem. bill tells you something. And, let's not forget, the public has stayed solidly opposed to both ObamaCare and the bailouts. Obama is in trouble because he would not do ANYTHING to lure at least a few Republicans to support his proposals. Oh, yes, I should say the proposals of the very far left Democrats who have controlled Congress for the past four years. I seriously doubt that Obama knows what the hell is in the ObamaCare law. Do you really think he read all of it before he signed it? I'll tell you what; let's see how the mid-terms work out. If the Republicans gain only 20-30 House seats, I will conclude that the anti-Obama/Democrat trend was just a fallacy (since the party in power always loses about that many). If the GOP picks up about 40-49 seats, I will conclude that Obama has been largely rejected. If the GOP picks up 50, 60, or even more seats, I will conclude that Obama has been thoroughly rejected by the American people. If the last of those scenarios comes true, it will be tough for Democrats to make excuses. Notice how Obama and the Dems frame the issues. If the Republicans do not fall in line and uncritically support any and all Democratic proposals, they are labeled the Party of No. How would that differ from the stance taken by the Democrats when Bush was President? Did the Democrats just salute and say, "Yes, Sir!"? Sure they did. Again, it did not have to be this way. Obama, who was supposed to be a new kind of unifying, post-partisan President, has acted as an ordinary bare-knuckles, ward-healing Chicago pol. He never stops campaigning. And he never stops treating those who hold a political view opposite his own as anything other than villains not worthy of respect. The American people have seen this and have drawn the appropriate conclusion. But, as I said, we will know more about all this after the election rersults are in. AzWm Right.  |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 3, 2010 6:23:18 GMT -8
Here's the problem with the arguments suggested by the pro-Obama posters. Obama and his congressional cohorts really did shove things down the GOP's throat. There was no serious attempt, as the article makes clear, to consider seriously any Republican ideas. Most Republicans these days are quite conservative, but there are still a few, especially in the Senate, who are more moderate. The fact that there were NO Rep. votes (thinking especially of the health insurance law) in favor the Dem. bill tells you something. And, let's not forget, the public has stayed solidly opposed to both ObamaCare and the bailouts. Obama is in trouble because he would not do ANYTHING to lure at least a few Republicans to support his proposals. Oh, yes, I should say the proposals of the very far left Democrats who have controlled Congress for the past four years. I seriously doubt that Obama knows what the hell is in the ObamaCare law. Do you really think he read all of it before he signed it? I'll tell you what; let's see how the mid-terms work out. If the Republicans gain only 20-30 House seats, I will conclude that the anti-Obama/Democrat trend was just a fallacy (since the party in power always loses about that many). If the GOP picks up about 40-49 seats, I will conclude that Obama has been largely rejected. If the GOP picks up 50, 60, or even more seats, I will conclude that Obama has been thoroughly rejected by the American people. If the last of those scenarios comes true, it will be tough for Democrats to make excuses. Notice how Obama and the Dems frame the issues. If the Republicans do not fall in line and uncritically support any and all Democratic proposals, they are labeled the Party of No. How would that differ from the stance taken by the Democrats when Bush was President? Did the Democrats just salute and say, "Yes, Sir!"? Sure they did. Again, it did not have to be this way. Obama, who was supposed to be a new kind of unifying, post-partisan President, has acted as an ordinary bare-knuckles, ward-healing Chicago pol. He never stops campaigning. And he never stops treating those who hold a political view opposite his own as anything other than villains not worthy of respect. The American people have seen this and have drawn the appropriate conclusion. But, as I said, we will know more about all this after the election rersults are in. AzWm The Republicans refused to cooperate with the Democrats, who hold vast majorities, on anything, due to the filibuster. You can't shove anything down the throat of of a mouth that has been sewn shut. Your contention that there were Republicans to lure is pure fantasy. Republicans have never treated Democrats or liberals with respect. If the Republicans regain the House or the Senate, we should not cooperate with any of their plans (which will consist of stupid investigations.) I got a Republican polling call yesterday from the candidate for the first congressional district in Washington. I don't think they liked what I had to say. The Democrats should take no prisoners. As for what the public believe about the health care reform, I believe that you are wrong. What is true is that Republican policies are less popular than Democrats and the one thing the Republicans fetishize the most, tax cuts, are opposed by most Americans. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Oct 3, 2010 15:26:01 GMT -8
Are you guys suggesting he no longer has a "mandate"? If he doesn't, I wonder why that is.... I'd love to see him try to "take it to them" now. Bring it on. As far as I am concerned he does, because the alternative party is peopled with some very low caliber people this year. The 'bamster' was a fad. He's rapidly going the way of the Hula Hoop. Just like most fads. |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 3, 2010 15:57:22 GMT -8
As far as I am concerned he does, because the alternative party is peopled with some very low caliber people this year. The 'bamster' was a fad. He's rapidly going the way of the Hula Hoop. Just like most fads. With candidates like the Christine O'Donnell, Sharon Ainge, Rand Paul and the like, how good can a Republican alternative to O Bama possibly be? My estimation is not very. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Oct 3, 2010 16:26:36 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 3, 2010 16:55:12 GMT -8
"Liberal scum" davdesid, class is your middle name.  |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 3, 2010 19:53:10 GMT -8
The 'bamster' was a fad. He's rapidly going the way of the Hula Hoop. Just like most fads. With candidates like the Christine O'Donnell, Sharon Ainge, Rand Paul and the like, how good can a Republican alternative to O Bama possibly be? My estimation is not very. I suggest that if a couple of those folks win it will show that America does not agree with your take. I will also say that if the candidates who beat RINO Repubs lose, it is really not a loss, but the beginning of the cleansing of the Republican Party. Obummer has been exposed and we may be getting back on track as a nation. |
|
