The plan to Obstruct Obama. He shall pass nothing.

[Nosmo King]

The Republican plan to destroy the Obama Presidency.
The New New Deal: Why the GOP Became the Party of No | TIME.com

Other than the few bubble heads still supporting the kenyan, who do you think believes this garbage?

No one. Time magazine is a leftist propaganda rag of the highest order. That's why they're going broke.

The tide is turning so fast against Soetoro it isn't funny. How did anyone think this little community organizer was ready to lead the most powerful nation on earth anyway? Only the gullible and the truly ignorant, and at this point, you have to be retarded to still be supporting his communist, immoral, anti American agenda.

Thank God there is someone to tell Hussein NO, otherwise we probably wouldn't even recognize America, since he hates it with such deep vitriol.

So the plan isn't to destroy the dully elected President of the United States based on his race, his name, his background, but because destroying the President is good, sound policy? It's not personal, it's business?

Arguments such as yours brings the light to the Republican strategy.

 

[Seawytch]

It reveals some of my reporting on the Republican plot to obstruct President Obama before he even took office, including secret meetings led by House GOP whip Eric Cantor (in December 2008) and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (in early January 2009) in which they laid out their daring (though cynical and political) no-honeymoon strategy of all-out resistance to a popular President-elect during an economic emergency. “If he was for it,” former Ohio Senator George Voinovich explained, “we had to be against it.”

Read more: The New New Deal: Why the GOP Became the Party of No | TIME.com

And yet we hear over and over here at USMB that it was President Obama's "I won" comment that "caused" the GOP to "resist" him.

 

[billyerock1991]

• David Obey, then chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, met with his GOP counterpart, Jerry Lewis, to explain what Democrats had in mind for the stimulus and ask what Republicans wanted to include. “Jerry’s response was, ‘I’m sorry, but leadership tells us we can’t play,’ ” Obey told me. “Exact quote: ‘We can’t play.’ What they said right from the get-go was, It doesn’t matter what the hell you do, we ain’t going to help you. We’re going to stand on the sidelines and bitch.”

Lewis blames Obey and the Democrats for the committee’s turn toward extreme partisanship, but he doesn’t deny that GOP leaders made a decision not to play. “The leadership decided there was no play to be had,” he says. Republicans recognized that after Obama’s big promises about bipartisanship, they could break those promises by refusing to cooperate. In the words of Congressman Tom Cole, a deputy Republican whip: “We wanted the talking point: ‘The only thing bipartisan was the opposition.’ ”

This comes as no surprise, of course. But it indeed confirms the fact that conservative and republican opposition to ‘everything Obama’ was purely partisan, devoid of fact or evidence, to the detriment of the Nation.

This is why the economy’s recovery isn’t as robust as it should be, due to republican foot-dragging and obstructionism.

the good side of their obstruction... repub-lie-tards will get voted out and the dems will control the house and senate com january 2015 ... and you say siingle payer ???? shure we can ... you watch.. you think thye whine now??? they will all lose their minds... be put away in the local nut house ...

 

[National Socialist]

The only time the people are safe anymore is when the idiots in power are not there trying to pass more stupid laws...As usual they are playing politics with peoples livelihoods.

Then stop voting for idiots

Kind of hard to do that when the only candidates with real shots are the establishment approved with a kosher stamp on them. Voting is pointless.

 

[Nosmo King]

The Continuing Resolution offered by the GOP 'leadership' locks in the sequester cuts. That means my job is again in danger. I thought the Republicans were pro job growth, but all public sector employees are sweating their policy out in deep worry for our future.

I did nothing wrong. I kept doing my job, paying my taxes and minding my business. But because I draw a paycheck from a public sector employer, I and all my co-workers have become the target of Conservative policy. Why?

Why should I support their actions? The result of which will be the end of my employment and my pension. Why should that be viewed as a political victory by those who claim to be pro-job growth when the result will mean fewer jobs?

If I were rich, did not produce one thing other than numbers in a hedge fund, the Republicans would hoist me on their shoulders and call me an economic hero. But I am in the fast dwindling Middle Class and a public sector employee. So I and others like me are expendable in the short-sighted minds of Conservative policy wonks.

 

[martybegan]

The Republican plan to destroy the Obama Presidency.
The New New Deal: Why the GOP Became the Party of No | TIME.com

Other than the few bubble heads still supporting the kenyan, who do you think believes this garbage?

No one. Time magazine is a leftist propaganda rag of the highest order. That's why they're going broke.

The tide is turning so fast against Soetoro it isn't funny. How did anyone think this little community organizer was ready to lead the most powerful nation on earth anyway? Only the gullible and the truly ignorant, and at this point, you have to be retarded to still be supporting his communist, immoral, anti American agenda.

Thank God there is someone to tell Hussein NO, otherwise we probably wouldn't even recognize America, since he hates it with such deep vitriol.

So the plan isn't to destroy the dully elected President of the United States based on his race, his name, his background, but because destroying the President is good, sound policy? It's not personal, it's business?

Arguments such as yours brings the light to the Republican strategy.

Its called opposing policy you disagree with. Evidently, according to you, the only time congress is allowed to disagree with a president is when its a democratic controlled congress disagreeing with a Republican President.

The rank hypocrisy here is staggering.

 

[billyerock1991]

Laughable, all you progressives can do is blame the GOP. Obama will not compromise at all, if there is a stalemate he gets to claim its the GOP's fault. The MSM carries his storyline and you parrots happily repeat it.

so when the republicans led by john boehner said they refuse to compromise ... you missed that one ... figures you never were too bright...

seems you missed when Obama said he would compromise with all of the Dem's favorite bills... medicare, food stamps,welfare, you know all of their faves ... what did the republicans do??? they refused to compromise ... Obama has time and time again tried to compromise with these repub-lie-turds and for some reason you missed that too... is that because you have your head planted firmly in your ass??? just askin'

 

[martybegan]

The Continuing Resolution offered by the GOP 'leadership' locks in the sequester cuts. That means my job is again in danger. I thought the Republicans were pro job growth, but all public sector employees are sweating their policy out in deep worry for our future.

I did nothing wrong. I kept doing my job, paying my taxes and minding my business. But because I draw a paycheck from a public sector employer, I and all my co-workers have become the target of Conservative policy. Why?

Why should I support their actions? The result of which will be the end of my employment and my pension. Why should that be viewed as a political victory by those who claim to be pro-job growth when the result will mean fewer jobs?

If I were rich, did not produce one thing other than numbers in a hedge fund, the Republicans would hoist me on their shoulders and call me an economic hero. But I am in the fast dwindling Middle Class and a public sector employee. So I and others like me are expendable in the short-sighted minds of Conservative policy wonks.

The federal government is a bloated monstronsity. Some State governments are bloated monstrosities. Progressive hellhole city governments are bloated monstrosites.

Public sector jobs are "overhead." Jobs that are there to do work needed to maintain the government for the rest of us. When the overhead costs too much, it has to be cut.

 

[TooTall]

• David Obey, then chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, met with his GOP counterpart, Jerry Lewis, to explain what Democrats had in mind for the stimulus and ask what Republicans wanted to include. “Jerry’s response was, ‘I’m sorry, but leadership tells us we can’t play,’ ” Obey told me. “Exact quote: ‘We can’t play.’ What they said right from the get-go was, It doesn’t matter what the hell you do, we ain’t going to help you. We’re going to stand on the sidelines and bitch.”

Lewis blames Obey and the Democrats for the committee’s turn toward extreme partisanship, but he doesn’t deny that GOP leaders made a decision not to play. “The leadership decided there was no play to be had,” he says. Republicans recognized that after Obama’s big promises about bipartisanship, they could break those promises by refusing to cooperate. In the words of Congressman Tom Cole, a deputy Republican whip: “We wanted the talking point: ‘The only thing bipartisan was the opposition.’ ”

This comes as no surprise, of course. But it indeed confirms the fact that conservative and republican opposition to ‘everything Obama’ was purely partisan, devoid of fact or evidence, to the detriment of the Nation.

This is why the economy’s recovery isn’t as robust as it should be, due to republican foot-dragging and obstructionism.

David Obey retired because he authored the massive bailout for all of those "shovel ready" jobs that weren't there and he would have lost his seat if he had not retired. He was replaced by Republican, Sean Duffy.

on edit: Obey would have won the "most partisan bastard" award when he served in the House. How ironic to hear him bitch about partisanship.

 

[billyerock1991]

• David Obey, then chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, met with his GOP counterpart, Jerry Lewis, to explain what Democrats had in mind for the stimulus and ask what Republicans wanted to include. “Jerry’s response was, ‘I’m sorry, but leadership tells us we can’t play,’ ” Obey told me. “Exact quote: ‘We can’t play.’ What they said right from the get-go was, It doesn’t matter what the hell you do, we ain’t going to help you. We’re going to stand on the sidelines and bitch.”

Lewis blames Obey and the Democrats for the committee’s turn toward extreme partisanship, but he doesn’t deny that GOP leaders made a decision not to play. “The leadership decided there was no play to be had,” he says. Republicans recognized that after Obama’s big promises about bipartisanship, they could break those promises by refusing to cooperate. In the words of Congressman Tom Cole, a deputy Republican whip: “We wanted the talking point: ‘The only thing bipartisan was the opposition.’ ”

This comes as no surprise, of course. But it indeed confirms the fact that conservative and republican opposition to ‘everything Obama’ was purely partisan, devoid of fact or evidence, to the detriment of the Nation.

This is why the economy’s recovery isn’t as robust as it should be, due to republican foot-dragging and obstructionism.

People seem to forget the disgraceful way Republicans carried on during the Clinton Presidency. They focused on completely destroying the Democratic President and came very close to succeeding. That laid the ground work for what we are witnessing now.

This is no accident. It's a deliberate strategy to insure the rule of the minority. All the while this is happening? The wealthiest 1 percent are absolutely sucking all profit out of the economy.

well, you know these repub-lie-tard voters you can tell them anything if you're a repub-lie-tard they'll believe it ... they still have figured out what the debt ceiling is ... that's sad...

 

[billyerock1991]

The Republican plan to destroy the Obama Presidency.
The New New Deal: Why the GOP Became the Party of No | TIME.com

Other than the few bubble heads still supporting the kenyan, who do you think believes this garbage?

No one. Time magazine is a leftist propaganda rag of the highest order. That's why they're going broke.

The tide is turning so fast against Soetoro it isn't funny. How did anyone think this little community organizer was ready to lead the most powerful nation on earth anyway? Only the gullible and the truly ignorant, and at this point, you have to be retarded to still be supporting his communist, immoral, anti American agenda.

Thank God there is someone to tell Hussein NO, otherwise we probably wouldn't even recognize America, since he hates it with such deep vitriol.

now this one says dirt stupid ... Ted cruse for president ???? what can we say other then this guy is dirt stupid ted cruse ???

BHW HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA OOOPS JUST FELL OUT OF MY CHAIR AGAIN

 

[billyerock1991]

The Republican plan to destroy the Obama Presidency.
The New New Deal: Why the GOP Became the Party of No | TIME.com

Interesting, but Obama's presidency has pretty much self-destructed under the weight of its own incompetency.

hers the problem with the congress harry reid he should have move the filibuster to 51 votes ... we dems would have got a lot of bills passed from the get go...

we would of passed a jobs bill ... the public option, the iimmigration bill, the debt ceiling a stimulus bill for 21.2 trillion dollars people would be up to their necks in wealth ... but obama tried to work with the repub-lie-turds and harry reid didn't want to change the filibuster rule ... that's what you get when you try to work with repub-lie-turds ...

 

[rightwinger]

The Republican plan to destroy the Obama Presidency.
The New New Deal: Why the GOP Became the Party of No | TIME.com

Interesting, but Obama's presidency has pretty much self-destructed under the weight of its own incompetency.

hers the problem with the congress harry reid he should have move the filibuster to 51 votes ... we dems would have got a lot of bills passed from the get go...

we would of passed a jobs bill ... the public option, the iimmigration bill, the debt ceiling a stimulus bill for 21.2 trillion dollars people would be up to their necks in wealth ... but obama tried to work with the repub-lie-turds and harry reid didn't want to change the filibuster rule ... that's what you get when you try to work with repub-lie-turds ...

Very true

Reid is a weak leader afraid to change the Filibuster rules. Once republicans started to abuse it to the extent they did and once republicans broke their promise to tone down the number of filibusters, Reid should have reverted to 51 votes

A functioning Senate is more important than maintaining an obsolete filibuster

 

[billyerock1991]

The Republican plan to destroy the Obama Presidency.
The New New Deal: Why the GOP Became the Party of No | TIME.com

THANK GOD! Obama is destroying our country with greater efficiency then ANY invading country!!!
As President you are destroying the tax paying base in this country.
You are signing 160% LESS Federal land oil leases which generates income and increases USA oil independence.
You are so bad in simple arithmetic you can't subtract from your supposedly "46 million " uninsured:
a) 10 million you consider uninsured THAT ARE NOT CITIZENS!
b) 14 million that only need register with Medicaid
c) 18 million that Can afford but don't need nor WANT to have health insurance.
d) leaving less then 4 million truly uninsured NOT 46 million!
As President your EPA has destroyed :

a) EPA itself estimated that its ozone standard would cost $90 billion a year, while other studies have projected that the rule could cost upwards of a trillion dollars and destroy 7.4 million jobs.

b)Boiler MACT Rule: EPA's Boiler MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) standards are so strict that not even the best-performing sources can meet them, so many companies will have no choice but to shut their doors and ship manufacturing jobs overseas. The rule has been projected to reduce US GDP by as much as 1.2 billion dollars and will destroy nearly 800,000 jobs.

Articles: Obama's EPA Plans for 2013

This President is destroying JOBS and TAX revenue!

and we get another stupid one amazing what wil the say next.. well it semms they keep saying thins that aren't really true ... I guess its ok for people to not buy health care , then go to the emergency room get what ever bothers them fixed on their dime then they bitch that their health care has gone up ...

they this clown say that 10 million illegals are getting health care will if he read the health car bill he wiould see where it say illegals can't get health care for any reason guess this stupid one missed that one too

hey who needs a Ozone when you can have a job ... to hell with your skin you didn't need it ... you want to shorten your life span any way ... like I say this one is stupid yeah whop need their health when you can have a job ...


like i said who needs their health when they can get a job ... never mind that these companies move out of here after polluting the country ... hell we won't need 800,000 jobs cause they all just die from lung and skin cancer... cause this clown repealed the EPA laws like I said these repub-lie-tards were never to bright

 

[Meathead]

FFS, get over it. If Obama had the political skills of a Clinton or Reagan he would have been able to overcome the obstacles every president is presented with by the opposition. Making lousy excuses for a poor performance is simply an acknowledgement of failure.

Obama was an affirmative action president and the social, economic and political state of the nation is in large part testament to his ineptness.

 

[Nosmo King]

Other than the few bubble heads still supporting the kenyan, who do you think believes this garbage?

No one. Time magazine is a leftist propaganda rag of the highest order. That's why they're going broke.

The tide is turning so fast against Soetoro it isn't funny. How did anyone think this little community organizer was ready to lead the most powerful nation on earth anyway? Only the gullible and the truly ignorant, and at this point, you have to be retarded to still be supporting his communist, immoral, anti American agenda.

Thank God there is someone to tell Hussein NO, otherwise we probably wouldn't even recognize America, since he hates it with such deep vitriol.

So the plan isn't to destroy the dully elected President of the United States based on his race, his name, his background, but because destroying the President is good, sound policy? It's not personal, it's business?

Arguments such as yours brings the light to the Republican strategy.

Its called opposing policy you disagree with. Evidently, according to you, the only time congress is allowed to disagree with a president is when its a democratic controlled congress disagreeing with a Republican President.

The rank hypocrisy here is staggering.

So what is the policy? Something about a Kenyan? A community organizer? Soetoro (sic)? An immoral communist anti-American named Hussein? Sure looks more personal than political.

 

[Nosmo King]

The Continuing Resolution offered by the GOP 'leadership' locks in the sequester cuts. That means my job is again in danger. I thought the Republicans were pro job growth, but all public sector employees are sweating their policy out in deep worry for our future.

I did nothing wrong. I kept doing my job, paying my taxes and minding my business. But because I draw a paycheck from a public sector employer, I and all my co-workers have become the target of Conservative policy. Why?

Why should I support their actions? The result of which will be the end of my employment and my pension. Why should that be viewed as a political victory by those who claim to be pro-job growth when the result will mean fewer jobs?

If I were rich, did not produce one thing other than numbers in a hedge fund, the Republicans would hoist me on their shoulders and call me an economic hero. But I am in the fast dwindling Middle Class and a public sector employee. So I and others like me are expendable in the short-sighted minds of Conservative policy wonks.

The federal government is a bloated monstronsity. Some State governments are bloated monstrosities. Progressive hellhole city governments are bloated monstrosites.

Public sector jobs are "overhead." Jobs that are there to do work needed to maintain the government for the rest of us. When the overhead costs too much, it has to be cut.

If you want to punish the poor by rolling back programs, that's one thing. But the true effect of the punitive policies of the GOP are the elimination of the jobs administering the programs.

Unless you're willing to say that each and every recipient of government largess is the same as some cartoon anecdote of a Welfare Queen of Food Stamp Surfer, you must keep the programs where legitimately disadvantaged folks are in need. And if that's the case, someone has to administer that aid.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

O's ideology offers no substance and is antithetical to growth. It should be opposed. But, todays R's give him anything he wants.

 

[Nosmo King]

Would Conservatives welcome a statesman into their ranks? Could Conservatives embrace the philosophy of the Founding Fathers and craft a compromise? Do Conservatives see virtues like statesmanship and compromise as important aspects of their political activism?

Or are they happy wallowing in the role of obstructionist, saboteur, intractable ideologue?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Would Conservatives welcome a statesman into their ranks? Could Conservatives embrace the philosophy of the Founding Fathers and craft a compromise? Do Conservatives see virtues like statesmanship and compromise as important aspects of their political activism?

Or are they happy wallowing in the role of obstructionist, saboteur, intractable ideologue?

Would liberals embrace the philosophy of the Founding Fathers..........

Neither party extolls any virtues that were set by the Founding Fathers.