Obama blames "structural" flaw of Congress

[Fishlore]

History will show that the Senate is indeed a reactionary anachronism that, historically, has served to frustrate the will of the people in order to preserve the privileges of the elite. I would expect the Senate to be neutered, not abolished. This is what the British have done with the House of Lords. Other nations have made similar adjustments. We will see direct election of the President as prelude to the change in the Senate.

These changes will not come about until the new majority produced by the dramatic shift in demographics already under way has consolidated its political power. My guess: twenty years or so. But come it willl

 

[Erand7899]

So no one informed Obama before he ran for President that if elected he would not get everything he wanted and would actually have to work with Congress?

First George W. Bush's SEC let Wall Street run a derivatives based Ponzi scheme that destroyed the world economy in 2008.

Then Republicans on the Supreme Court voted to allow unlimited secret campaign contributions in the Citizens United decision.

Then Republicans in Congress voted against infrastructure spending that would have lowered unemployment.

Then Republicans in the House shut down the government and threatened the country with default.

Why would anyone vote for a party that hates government and continually tries to damage our country?

The flawed derivatives had nothing to do with any ponzi scheme, and they did not destroy the world's economy.

It is impossible for the Republicans in the House to shut down the government all by themselves. An impasse requires two parties.

Oh yes, those shovel ready jobs back again. You loons never learn do you.

Liberal/socialists continually throw out these little bits of propaganda as if it was handed down from God. However, their messiah is not God, and none the BS is even true.

Why would anyone vote for people that cannot find the means to speak the truth? The vast majority of you are dishonest bigots, and the people you elect are of the same ilk. Do your country a favor and forget to vote.

 

[norwegen]

Only the neanderthalls

No man's life liberty or property is safe while congress is in session

I have been through over 50 sessions and my liberty and property are intact

For being more than 100 years old, you still have half your wits about you.

Very impressive.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Me: Obama is arguing for Madison's original Big State plan that would make representation in both Senate and House based on population. Washington agreed with it and some others as well. I think Obama, Washington, and Madison were wrong, but it does put the president in good company

Obama is what the Founding Fathers worried about

Me: Sure, they would not have abided a person of color in office as their equal.
------------------------ and

Read the fucking Patriot Act you ignorant fuck. How old were you during the Bush presidency, 10?

me: The immediate above quote completely dismantles the doosh and neo-cons.

Washington came from Virginia, A Big State, thus it should shock no one to hear he approved of fellow Viginian Madison's plan: The plan, also has the lower house electing members of the upper house.

The Legislature would then elect the Executive.

I doubt Lincoln would have ever been President.

You are right, I believe. The power that Madison invested in the National Legislature admittedly was great.

"6. Resolved that each branch ought to possess the right of originating Acts; that the National Legislature ought to be impowered to enjoy the Legislative Rights vested in Congress bar the Confederation & moreover to legislate in all cases to which the separate States are incompetent, or in which the harmony of the United States may be interrupted by the exercise of individual Legislation; to negative all laws passed by the several States, contravening in the opinion of the National Legislature the articles of Union; and to call forth the force of the Union agst any member of the Union failing to fulfill its duty under the articles thereof."

Read more: The Virginia Plan - May 29, 1787 by James Madison

Any one who thinks that Madison was not a Big Government dude does not the history of the Convention.

 

[MACAULAY]

Obama blames "structural" flaw of Congress

I suppose he really couldn't blame Bush...

---------------------------------------------------------------

But, they are blaming Jefferson, indirectly anyway.

When he saw the Constitution...he read it first in Paris, where he was serving...he said it must have three things to be ultimately successful.

1) A Bill of Rights to restrain the Central Power. He got that, and damn how the Socialists do hate it today;

2) Term limits on the Presidency, which he got many years later, after the Country got its 4 term dose of the first Left-Wing Loon President; and

3) Term limits on Congress, else it become filled with pimps and whores.

They ignored him here and its a killer. See Harry Reed, Nancy Pelosi, and doddering, senile, old Pork Kings like Thad Cochran of Mississippi.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Damn, this President is one stupid sorry son of a bitch. He cannot even figure out the simplest stuff.

There is no need for a Senate at all if it is just a popularly elected group of legislators. We already have a popularly elected house. And now the moron in chief wants it to be more akin to the House by proportional representation? Why? We need a House And a House? WTF is wrong with Obumbler?

As Mark Levin aptly noted just a couple of days ago, the popularly elected House of Congress is the one with a REPUBLICAN majority at present.

I'll grant that you a Democrat Parody led Senate is kind of pathetic, but is President Obumbler REALLY asking for the Dims to lose control over the Senate, now? IF so, for the first time in a long time, I'd be willing to agree with Barry Obumbler.

Rather than doing something pointless like seeking more "Democracy" in this fashion, let's all dare to dream the dream. Let's make the Constitutional Republic more of a Constitutional Republic by eliminating the popular election of U.S. Senators and returning it to an institution populated by STATE government appointees. And, let's have one house of Congress that isn't proportional but is instead designed to further the interest of FEDERALISM. In short, Mr. President. It aint broke, so stop trying to tinker with it.

We know you are "frustrated" with a Congress that isn't your little rubber stamp. But you are completely head up your own ass wrong about this. Let's make sure that they can serve as a roadblock to your dictatorial inclinations. You consider them "dysfunctional." You are wrong. Blocking you or others like you is a perfectly GOOD and useful and desirable function.

Please pull a Nixon for us, Mr. President. Just fucking resign.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Senate was a necessary evil to get all the states on board.

 

[norwegen]

The Senate was a necessary evil to get all the states on board.

How quaint. The states wouldn't join the union unless it incorporated evil.

 

[regent]

The Senate was a necessary evil to get all the states on board.

The Constitution was a pretty liberal document for its day. I wonder if the same framers were alive today and asked to write a Constitution, what it would look like?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

No man's life liberty or property is safe while congress is in session

I have been through over 50 sessions and my liberty and property are intact

For being more than 100 years old, you still have half your wits about you.

Very impressive.

I had no idea we had one of the worlds oldest people posting on the board.

 

[007]

History will show that the Senate is indeed a reactionary anachronism that, historically, has served to frustrate the will of the people in order to preserve the privileges of the elite. I would expect the Senate to be neutered, not abolished. This is what the British have done with the House of Lords. Other nations have made similar adjustments. We will see direct election of the President as prelude to the change in the Senate.

These changes will not come about until the new majority produced by the dramatic shift in demographics already under way has consolidated its political power. My guess: twenty years or so. But come it willl

Not by voting. Going to take something more dramatic than that.

 

[AmericanFirst]

"President Obama is taking a swipe at the Founding Fathers, blaming his inability to move his agenda on the “disadvantage” of having each state represented equally in the Senate."

He's complaining because the system is working as it's supposed to, to curb his power.


“Obviously, the nature of the Senate means that California has the same number of Senate seats as Wyoming. That puts us at a disadvantage,” Mr. Obama said."

"The president also blamed “demographics” for the inability of the Democratic Party to gain more power in Congress, saying Democrats “tend to congregate a little more densely” in cities such as New York and Chicago. He said it gives Republicans disproportional clout in Congress."


Read more: Obama blames 'structural' design of Congress for gridlock - Washington Times
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter



Yup, progressive douchebags tend to cluster in a couple of large cities, and they think they should have the authority to dictate what everybody else spread out over the nation is allowed to do.

Too bad.

He sure cries a lot when the constitution actually works to stop his stupidity. What a blithering cry baby, like most libtards.

 

[AmericanFirst]

You would hear the very same tune being sung by a Republican president if the situation were reversed.

Really? Like who? Did Reagan whine about it? How about the Bushes when they had a Democratic Senate? Obama is the only president I can think of who has ever had an issue with the way our balance of power is set up. In fact, it shows his gross ignorance which is tragic considering he was allegedly a professor of Constitutional law.

Two things.

First of all, our gov't worked better back in the days of Reagan not because of Reagan per se, but because there wasn't as much of an ideological schism between the political parties. While Republicans and Democrats still had their differences, they were able to work together on a wide variety of issues.

Secondly, I'm not referring to who does and doesn't complain. I'm referring to the kind of political gridlock that brings gov't operations and the general progress that needs to be made on a wide number of issues to a grinding halt.

Tell that to the idiot reid, he is the biggest gridlock in congress. Dimwits with obamashitforbrains are so stupid.

 

[Crick]

Those of you unhappy with President Obama would look a good deal more educated and more objective were you to wait until he's actually done or said something worth criticism. Characterizing Obama's comments here that the concentration of democrats in urban population centers weakens their ability to control the Senate, as an attack on the government's Constitutionally mandated structure, only serves to make you look like someone scrabbling for something with which to attack the man. That is; that you've got little or nothing to hold against him. Of course this is the actual state of affairs, but I'm not the one to rub that in.

 

[Clementine]

WAAAAAAHHHHH!!!! I can't be a dictator!!!!!!

Poor Obama is constrained by a document that our founding fathers put in place. He's lamented that very fact a time or two. That whole freedom of speech thing really sticks in his craw, too. He expressed envy of the dictator who had a much more obedient press that knew their place.

As we speak, he is probably researching to see if there are even more ways to completely subvert congress and continue with his agenda. He seems to think having a pen and phone will trump due process.

Most of the people they think they should represent are illegals. I do believe anchor children and their illegal parents tend to stick to certain sanctuary cities and the Dems would like them to have more say in how our country runs. California is one big sanctuary state.

 

[Crick]

Has Obama claimed unjustified presidential powers they way GW Bush did? No. Did you get on Bush's case for that? No.

Case closed.

 

[Wyld Kard]

Those of you unhappy with President Obama would look a good deal more educated and more objective were you to wait until he's actually done or said something worth criticism. Characterizing Obama's comments here that the concentration of democrats in urban population centers weakens their ability to control the Senate, as an attack on the government's Constitutionally mandated structure, only serves to make you look like someone scrabbling for something with which to attack the man. That is; that you've got little or nothing to hold against him. Of course this is the actual state of affairs, but I'm not the one to rub that in.

Those of you unhappy with President Obama would look a good deal more educated and more objective were you to wait until he's actually done or said something worth criticism.

Are you fucking kidding?

News Flash dumbass, Obama has already done and said plenty that is worth impeachment.

Duh!

 

[HenryBHough]

Mere criticism?

How about worthy of impeachment? Prevented only by the knowledge that Democrats would circle the wagons and never bring themselves to acknowledge that so much He has done is unconstitutional and in violation of the oath (he finally got around to) sworn on a Bible?

 

[JakeStarkey]

CRUZ / LEE - 2016 will ensure a massive Democratic victory across the board.

 

[HenryBHough]

CRUZ / LEE - 2016 will ensure a massive Democratic victory across the board.

And you Marxist leaning Democrats are doing your best toward that. Which shows that once out of the basement much may be possible.

Someday.