|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 05 2013 @ 10:11 AM EDT |
It would be nice if there were bipartisan support, but I'm
afraid
the Republicans in Congress will quash this effort for
no other reason than that
it originated with Obama.
And it would take him getting a skin dye
job and joining the Republican party to change that. But that does not mean
that he does not try, and whatever compromise the Republicans now call
"inacceptable" they can't really adopt when they are in charge again without
looking like hypocrites.The post-Obama era would have a better starting
position if he indeed made leftist and Marxist policies like his political
opponents fantasize: then finding a political position recognizably rightwards
would not require reverting to extremism. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Way out of line - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 05 2013 @ 12:45 PM EDT
- Way out of line - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 05 2013 @ 04:49 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, June 05 2013 @ 12:50 PM EDT |
If Obama were to actually make an effort to build bipartisan support for once
instead of making mouth motions but behaving spectacularly and arrogantly
partisan, perhaps there would be bipartisan support for some of what he tries to
do. He continues to behave as though he owns both houses of Congress and
doesn't care what the loyal opposition thinks about anything. He prefers to
throw blame than man up and actually work toward a consensus.
Don't forget - the original "party of no" was the Democrat party
during the first two years of the first GW Bush term... it's the way things are
supposed to work, according to the Democrats.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
