OMG Politics, I'm over it already.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dogsinotpalc said:
I disagree. While it turned out to actually be wasted time, he clearly tried in earnest to truly work with the republicans. So I cannot and will not fault him for attempting bipartisan efforts. The fact that even the centrists in the GOP decided to cow to the pundit and tea party notion of stonewalling anything that wasn't exactly as they wanted or even rejected what they wanted if he or any Democrats proposed legislation is hardly his fault. Plowing over them to force legislation would have possibly given us President Romney, which while more appealing than Trump would not have been ideal.

Hindsight being 20/20 I'm sure even he realizes he should have tried to push more through in the first half of his first term, but I commend him for trying to bridge the gap. I would just hope that had McCain or Romney won and gotten a republican Congress that they wouldn't have just gone crazy with only promoting their agenda and flipping off at least half of the country that didn't support them. We had too much of that with Dubya...he and his republican congress literally set back environmental law decades. We should be far more advanced with alternative fuels (and transitioning coal and oil workers to those jobs) and have a larger selection of affordable electric and hybrid vehicles available, but to myopic perspective of Bush and his oil family mind set decided that fossil fuels are the present and where we should stay. And that's just one area where they fucked up.

Anyway, fuck any politician...and while I could leave it there, Ima get specific and say fuck any politician that won't work with his/her colleagues across party lines to do the work of benefiting the greater good. They're on both sides, but there are inarguably exponentially more republicans that will concede nothing.

I've pointed to this example before. When Obama spoke to the HoR about the Affordable Care Act, he asked them what would need to be changed to get them to vote for it. They provided specific changes. President Obama made the changes and when they House voted, not a single republican voted for the ACA. As such, for all of their complaining, they are just a culpable for any shortcomings of the ACA as anyone else. Were they willing to work with the President and Senate Democrats, the we might have a far better ACA (which we all remember was based on the healthcare legislation Romney and his people put in place in Massachusetts, but even he bad-mouthed during the 2012 race).

Fuck, not again...
Click to expand...

I remember an interview with Boehnor a little while before the vote. He actually said we agree with about 90% of the. bill so we should scrap it and start over with a true bipartisan bill. You agree with 90% but should scrap it and start over? I really hope the republican base is fed up with the party of no and gets rid of the ones in office. I don't care if it is another republican as long as they are willing to compromise and work across the aisle.
 
GDSmithTX said:
As awful as the right has been about relentless, historically unprecedented obstructionism (mostly to the detriment of the nation), and about their 8-year extended tantrum about ObamaHitlerStalinMao's tyrannical rule*, think how much worse it would have been had he used that advantage from the outset.

* And I want to state this outright with no equivocation: if you have at any time bought into any of the countless fact-free conspiracy theories, despicable propaganda and outright hate speech the right has spread like radioactive syphilis about Obama, you are a moron whose opinions are worth nothing because of your stupid gullibility.​
Click to expand...
I take issue with the estimate that governing effectively would have strengthened the republicans.
 
14650136_10207483843149854_2251700498158195915_n.jpg
 
Kerouac said:
Benghazi doesn't mean a damn thing, especially when you try to tie it to Clinton. There is no evidence of any kind that they could have prevented the attack on the embassy by any other means than security reinforcements, which the GOP denied funding for. The Benghazi Witch Hunt has cost the Amerian taxpayers millions, and Gowdy has even admitted it was a political ploy.
Click to expand...

Spot on, but allow me a minor note of correction that is significant in this case. Benghazi was just a consulate, not a full blown embassy. The difference in security between the two would be like comparing a magazine stand and a bank building.
An excellent breakdown was reported right after the attacks in the PBS article:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/securing-embassies/
 
Kerouac said:
Not only is that untrue, that's the same sort of misogynistic bullshit that Trump and his camp have been spewing for months. Clinton is the most qualified for the job. It's that simple. She may not be likable, but she can do the job and there is not a single other candidate on the ballot that can. Pulling the woman card is dismissive and frankly, reflects a poor understanding of the political process.
Click to expand...
tina-amy-bitches.png
 
Tig said:
Spot on, but allow me a minor note of correction that is significant in this case. Benghazi was just a consulate, not a full blown embassy. The difference in security between the two would be like comparing a magazine stand and a bank building.
An excellent breakdown was reported right after the attacks in the PBS article:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/securing-embassies/
Click to expand...

You are correct and I should have caught that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tig
Kerouac said:
She isn't the best the Democrats have to offer, but that still doesn't mean she's not the most qualified.

In a perfect world, the politicians that gives us warm fuzzies and delivers are the best choice, but this is not a perfect world. In 2008 and in the 2016 primaries, I voted for Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders, because I felt their vision for America resonated the most for me, but that doesn't mean I thought that Hillary Clinton was incompetent, or a criminal, or any of the other descriptors she is often hit with. She's an incredibly capable, intelligent, and determined candidate, but my personal politics lean much further to the left, and my primary votes reflect that.

Clinton has had to move her policies further to the left, because that's what the Democratic Party has decided we want. Clinton is far more of a centrist than I would like, but in light of how far afield the GOP has moved on their issues, she's painted a socialist or worse.

I respect you a lot, and don't begrudge your criticism of her, or not wanting to vote for her. But the reality is we are a two party system and only a constitutional overhaul will change that. There is a lot to like about Stein, precious little to like (again, from solely my perspective) about Pence, and I find Trump the personification of every ugly American stereotype that exists. He's a bully, he's unstable, and he has no qualifications to enter the government, much less he highest office in the land.

There are other would-be candidates that I would prefer, but that doesn't mean I can't vote for Clinton with a clean conscience. I can't say the same for several people I know that are voting for Trump.
Click to expand...
Sometimes I swear that Andy is inside my head taking the scattered musing of the mashed potatoes between my ears and turning them into cohesive, intellectual ideas.
 
Kelly said:
I take issue with the estimate that governing effectively would have strengthened the republicans.
Click to expand...

I don't.

When in the last quarter century have they shown any sort of restraint or sense or cooperation when a Democratic president or Democratic-controlled legislative body has governed effectively? Have they not almost always lied and screamed and thrown themselves on the floor in the perfect imitation of a spoiled two year old's temper tantrum? Have they not riled up their ignorant herd of a base against practically everything Democrat with dire warnings of shit like "Death panels!!" and "Climate Change is a Damn Lie!!" and "Clinton/Obama/Clinton is coming fer yer shootin' irons!" and "Obamaphones!!" and "Voter Frowd!!"? And that last one should have a post-fix of "by the nigras!!"

If Obama had actively used what advantage he had to ram through things we agree with, it would have been proof positive to the hordes of mouthbleating fucktards that ObamaTheKenyanMuslimSocialoFascist Dicktater was ruling with an ahrn fist and gotsta be done rose up aginst!

Despite the fact that not a single one of their bloated, vacant faces has been explodified by a government rifle, not a single one of them was imprisoned for their goddamned flatworm views, and none of their precious, precious guns had been taken away.

Facts do not matter to those with an impacted recto-cranial inversion. The outcry and obstructionism and (god forbid) political violence would have been far, far worse.

Why? Because a black man was telling them what to do.
 
Last edited:
It now seems that Trump supporters, or at least the lunatic fringe, have taken to social media to suggest repealing the 19th amendment so only men can vote, as Trump does well with men.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top