Lately I have noticed a return by the Obama administration to the tired old Democratic tactic of calling those in opposition to his foolish agenda as being "obstructionists". This is something that Obama and his comrade Democrats in congress have been doing all along, of course, but it seems they are now doubling down with this tactic lately, as has been reported ad nauseum by their Democratic allies in the state-controlled main stream media.My advice to the Republicans that actually are in opposition to Obama and the congressional communists is for them to say, "Damn right we are obstructing your Marxist agenda!" Unlike the conventional wisdom that I hear so many people say about how they just wish that those in congress could just get along with each other, I definitely do NOT want them to all get along with one another.
The Democrats and Obama's agenda is foolish, dangerous, and often un-Constitutional. I expect my elected representatives in congress to fight, oppose, and if necessary to obstruct this un-American Bolshevikism from being enacted into law. Now, they can be civil and of good humor while they irritate and obstruct the communist side of the aisle in their debates, but I as a voter insist that they don't just give in to that tripe in order to just get along. They all swore an oath to uphold the Constitution. It would be nice if at least one party took that oath seriously.
Please tell me, what part of the Obama agenda should the Republicans NOT try to obstruct or be in opposition towards anyway? Should they support his desire for cap & tax climate change legislation that is based on manipulated and falsified "scientific" data? How about Obama's insistence on mirandizing terrorists and giving them American Constitutional rights to a civil trial? How about the trillions spent for TARP and the stimulus packages? How about Obama's snubbing our allies like Israel? How about his governmental take over of private companies?How about his making us and our allies less safe by scrapping a theater missile defense system that was to be built in Poland and the Czech Republic? How about his protocol-inaccurate and American-demeaning habit of bowing to every head of state he encounters? How about his half-measures in fighting the war on terrorism and turning it into a giant police criminal investigation?
The bottom line is that if it appears that the current Republicans in congress are obstructing everything that Obama and the Democrats are trying to do, then that is a very good thing for a change I truly can believe in. Evidently the Republicans are the only party that is listening to their constituents and the majority of the American people. If they continue on this course, it is likely they will be rewarded with a stronger minority, if not an actual majority in one or possibly even both houses of congress later this year.
Obama insisted he would be a post-partisan president when he was campaigning. He would unite the country again. Frankly, I knew this was a bunch of crap from the very beginning just by looking at his past actions. Never has Obama reached across the aisle and compromised with those of the Republican party. His sole idea of compromise is for the right to move to his side of the argument.
Obama insisted he would be a post-partisan president when he was campaigning. He would unite the country again. Frankly, I knew this was a bunch of crap from the very beginning just by looking at his past actions. Never has Obama reached across the aisle and compromised with those of the Republican party. His sole idea of compromise is for the right to move to his side of the argument.
Well, when the Republicans did this, ala George W. Bush and the previous congress led by Dennis Hastert, we the majority of American people got ticked really quickly and tended not to show up on election day to vote for these fools. If the Republicans want to compromise and govern like Democrats, then we might just as well elect the Democrats. Hence the mess we are currently in the midst of in our country. It seems the Republicans have learned this lesson well.
Our very nation was founded in the midst of passionate and often-times heated debate. THAT IS the American way. When the party in the minority is not allowed to have its ideas heard in a debate and the resulting legislation is contrary to everything truly American, then I think it is a party's duty to do whatever they can to obstruct the passage of such bills. Yes, continue to put forth your ideas to the public so that they know what your position is on the issues, but by all means obstruct away if that is the only recourse available to prevent the United States from becoming just another socialist quasi-European nation. In that regard not only is obstructionism a good thing, it is a necessary tactic!
Our very nation was founded in the midst of passionate and often-times heated debate. THAT IS the American way. When the party in the minority is not allowed to have its ideas heard in a debate and the resulting legislation is contrary to everything truly American, then I think it is a party's duty to do whatever they can to obstruct the passage of such bills. Yes, continue to put forth your ideas to the public so that they know what your position is on the issues, but by all means obstruct away if that is the only recourse available to prevent the United States from becoming just another socialist quasi-European nation. In that regard not only is obstructionism a good thing, it is a necessary tactic!
2 comments:
"Never has Obama reached across the aisle and compromised with those of the Republican party. His sole idea of compromise is for the right to move to his side of the argument."
This is, of course, factually incorrect. He has had numerous meetings with Congressional Republicans, incorporated their (inferior) ideas into legislation, and the Congress has voted on thousands of amendments put forth by the GOP. You are confusing their ideas being voted down in committee or on the floor with them not being allowed to participate (a blatant lie used as a talking point by the Fox News crowd).
But, why do you see compromise as the majority needs to move in the direction of the minority, and not the other way around? If the Democrats had 60% of the Senate, apprx. 60% in the House, and the White House, why does the Republican party get 100% of their way? What is the point of democracy if the winners have to mirror everything the losers already tried and failed at? People voted for change in 08, not more of the same.
You all on the right seem to have this revisionist idea of history that when the GOP was in charge they allowed even 10% as much participation from the other side as the GOP has been given now. Every single piece of legislation was rammed through without Democratic amendments or contributions for the first six years of the Bush presidency. The Obama record of working with the other side is stellar compared to the previous president.
But when you have such partisan pettiness as one Republican Senator putting a blanket hold on 70 administration nominations, the only way to assess the behavior of the Republican party is that it is acting in very bad faith.
When Republican ideas are included in bills (and they often are despite your baseless talking points) the party still votes against it in unison. They even vote against bills that have Republican co-sponsors. What is the point of continued compromise when the GOP's entire agenda is not to solve any of the problems they created but to destroy the President of the United States.
They are the party of no: no ideas, no clues, no concept of governing, and lastly no truth to their bogus claim that they aren't allowed to contribute. Not getting 100% of what you want is very different from being excluded altogether.
Splash, I am afraid you are the one that is wrong... again.
First let me start by saying that you are indeed correct regarding the fact that the majority party has no obligation to move to the minority party's side of any debate.
They are the majority and as such, it is their right to vote straight down-the-line Marxist legislation out of committee. (Of course they will eventually have to answer to their bosses when election time comes...and it is coming!)
I also acknowledge that this is a tactic used by Republicans in the past when they were the majority, although you are incorrect in your assertion that they were much more blatant about it then than the Democrats are now.
Back to the main point though. When it comes to major legislation such as the Obamacare bill, this was not done with Republicans in good faith in committee.
There have been numerous Republicans stating that they weren't even allowed to participate in committee.
Further, most of the final work was done with ONLY the committee chairmen from the Senate, the House, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and President Obama behind closed doors. It was not debated and televised on C-Span with Republican input like Obama promised it would be EIGHT times during his campaign.
The Democrats then have the audacity to say the Republicans do not have any ideas regarding health care, when they are not even allowed to be a part of the process by and large. (Never mind the fact that the GOP has a much more sensible plan that actually would insure more people and reduce health care costs on line at GOP.gov for many months now!)
Post a Comment