President preached unity in his inauguration speech.

"We gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord," the nation's 44th president said.

Now, when I listen to him it is all about the division of the country.The more I listen, the more I hear about division and not unity. What, if anything has he done to unify the country?

Prescott;474922 wrote:President preached unity in his inauguration speech.

"We gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord," the nation's 44th president said.

Now, when I listen to him it is all about the division of the country.The more I listen, the more I hear about division and not unity. What, if anything has he done to unify the country?

Well....I sort of give the Anointed One credit for the Tea Party Movement....but I'm pretty sure that's not the kind of unity he was hoping for.

Absolutely Nothing .... another thing on a long list of failures and incompetency

Honestly, nothing. And, this has been the worst outcome of his Presidency so far.

I have to wonder if many of those who voted for President Obama are regretting their decision. Perhaps Bellever is right, Obama did unite the country in a way he or the Dems expected. I am sure the far left are siting at home with an image of the movie Stars Wars: Episode III- Revenge of the Sith in their minds:

"You were the Chosen One! It was said that you would destroy the Sith, not join them. It was you would would bring balance to the Force, not leave it in Darkness".

Not a whole lot.

More importantly...does the fact that he's failed on this important issue cost him 4 more years of on-the-job-training?

BGFalcons82;475036 wrote:More importantly...does the fact that he's failed on this important issue cost him 4 more years of on-the-job-training?

Depends.

If the Republicans were to some how take over both houses of Congress some how in November, then he wins re-election for sure. If they get the House and not the Senate, it is 50/50. If somehow Democrats hold both houses of Congress this fall, he has no chance of being re-elected.

It's kind of hard to unify the country when the other side refuses to to try and help and hopes you fail

Iggy...he also has the greatest resource any President can have in a re-election bid....14 months of unopposed campaiging during which he can build himself up and tear down every Republican candidate that's running

Ty Webb;475090 wrote:It's kind of hard to unify the country when the other side refuses to to try and help and hopes you fail

Iggy...he also has the greatest resource any President can have in a re-election bid....14 months of unopposed campaiging during which he can build himself up and tear down every Republican candidate that's running

Get your head out of Obama's ass and you'd realize how ridiculous you sound spouting crap like this. Like any Democrats gave help to Bush or any other Republican President. Don't try and act like the Dems are some high and mighty group trying to help the American people. Bullshit.

Ty Webb;475090 wrote:It's kind of hard to unify the country when the other side refuses to to try and help and hopes you fail

Iggy...he also has the greatest resource any President can have in a re-election bid....14 months of unopposed campaiging during which he can build himself up and tear down every Republican candidate that's running

He's had nearly two years of as close to absolute power down the street as any president could hope for. Leading his side would be enough as a purely practical matter, and he's failed miserably at that.

Like any Democrats gave help to Bush or any other Republican President.

No, but in fairness statistically the level of obstruction BHO has dealt with is really unprecedented.

I do worry for the country somewhat the the Republicans have been so effective in killing everything BHO wants to do (once they lost the 60 votes) that this country will literally be ungovernable in the future unless 1 party has 60 senate votes because Democrats have already vowed they will in turn use the Republican scorched earth policy to the same extent when they take over again, whenever that may be.

We have gotten to the point that politically, Republicans need the economy to stay in the tank because were things to improve appreciably under Democrat control/BHO it would probably create a generation of Democrats like happened when FDR was credited for pulling us out of the Depression.

Something is going to have to give at some point in this country because we can't have both political parties vowing perpetual scorched earth policies as a way of getting back into power.

The best thing that could happen to this country would be for someone like Michael Bloomberg throw a billion dollars at the next election and run for President as an independent.

If you look at the polling, Republicans are going to take over Congress by default because they are the alternative. However, their public approval numbers are still dismal, as are the Democrats.

That tells me the public is looking for alternatives because as the Democrats and Republicans that get elected become more and more ideologically pure by voting out the moderates, this country becomes more and more ungovernable. The public doesn't like that, but as of now has no real alternatives.

The people who cheer for gridlock as a good thing are nuts considering where the country is right now. Gridlock was great when the economy was roaring and debt was low, but we are in debt up to our eyeballs with the boomers about to retire and there are some major decisions and problems to deal with.

The rest of the world looks at us and sees a government that can't function anymore, and if that continues for long enough it is going to effect our ability to borrow as well as a whole host of other things because China (among others) has wondered aloud if there is a political mechanism/will in place to ever address our debt.

Instead of getting serious about getting our debt under control, they see Americans arguing among themselves whether we should keep the $3 trillion dollar tax cut in place, or the $3.8 trillion dollar tax cut in place as if money was no object. It is crazyness, and the politicians from each party are just driving us toward the cliff in a race to see who can get us there fast enough.

That's all well and good, but there will never be a government in place that will tackle the debt problems of this country. Independent, Republican or Democrat, they will all try to put a band-aid on the problem and pass it on to future generations. That is what always happens in this country, and it's not going to change ever. Unless we have an honest to goodness bloody revolution again, the politicians have all the power and will never give it up. It doesn't matter if you have the most non DC beltway Independent unknown politician in the world elected as President, the moment he gets elected he is owned by the lobbyists and the moneymakers in DC. They are all the same.

IggyPride00;475173 wrote:No, but in fairness statistically the level of obstruction BHO has dealt with is really unprecedented.

I do worry for the country somewhat the the Republicans have been so effective in killing everything BHO wants to do (once they lost the 60 votes) that this country will literally be ungovernable in the future unless 1 party has 60 senate votes because Democrats have already vowed they will in turn use the Republican scorched earth policy to the same extent when they take over again, whenever that may be.

We have gotten to the point that politically, Republicans need the economy to stay in the tank because were things to improve appreciably under Democrat control/BHO it would probably create a generation of Democrats like happened when FDR was credited for pulling us out of the Depression.

Something is going to have to give at some point in this country because we can't have both political parties vowing perpetual scorched earth policies as a way of getting back into power.

The best thing that could happen to this country would be for someone like Michael Bloomberg throw a billion dollars at the next election and run for President as an independent.

If you look at the polling, Republicans are going to take over Congress by default because they are the alternative. However, their public approval numbers are still dismal, as are the Democrats.

That tells me the public is looking for alternatives because as the Democrats and Republicans that get elected become more and more ideologically pure by voting out the moderates, this country becomes more and more ungovernable. The public doesn't like that, but as of now has no real alternatives.

The people who cheer for gridlock as a good thing are nuts considering where the country is right now. Gridlock was great when the economy was roaring and debt was low, but we are in debt up to our eyeballs with the boomers about to retire and there are some major decisions and problems to deal with.

The rest of the world looks at us and sees a government that can't function anymore, and if that continues for long enough it is going to effect our ability to borrow as well as a whole host of other things because China (among others) has wondered aloud if there is a political mechanism/will in place to ever address our debt.

Instead of getting serious about getting our debt under control, they see Americans arguing among themselves whether we should keep the $3 trillion dollar tax cut in place, or the $3.8 trillion dollar tax cut in place as if money was no object. It is crazyness, and the politicians from each party are just driving us toward the cliff in a race to see who can get us there fast enough.

I more or less agree with many of your points but one I strongly disagree with is your opinion of those of us who see gridlock in DC as a positive thing. For the very scorched earth fact you stated above, we need balance right now to keep the damage to a minimum.

As far as the Chinese are concerned trust me on this: They NEED us as much as we need them. If Americans cannot afford to purchase their products who the hell else will sustain the Chinese economic miracle? The Europeans? They have the same issues we're dealing with.

Maybe the United States should call in all the debts we are owed but have forgiven since WWII (including the capitalist loving Chi-Coms).

Bottom line: I firmly believe that things always come to equilibrium, that what goes around comes around, and that things always work themselves out in the wash. It ALWAYS does.

IggyPride00;475173 wrote:No, but in fairness statistically the level of obstruction BHO has dealt with is really unprecedented.

I do worry for the country somewhat the the Republicans have been so effective in killing everything BHO wants to do (once they lost the 60 votes) that this country will literally be ungovernable in the future unless 1 party has 60 senate votes because Democrats have already vowed they will in turn use the Republican scorched earth policy to the same extent when they take over again, whenever that may be.

We have gotten to the point that politically, Republicans need the economy to stay in the tank because were things to improve appreciably under Democrat control/BHO it would probably create a generation of Democrats like happened when FDR was credited for pulling us out of the Depression.

Something is going to have to give at some point in this country because we can't have both political parties vowing perpetual scorched earth policies as a way of getting back into power.

The best thing that could happen to this country would be for someone like Michael Bloomberg throw a billion dollars at the next election and run for President as an independent.

If you look at the polling, Republicans are going to take over Congress by default because they are the alternative. However, their public approval numbers are still dismal, as are the Democrats.

That tells me the public is looking for alternatives because as the Democrats and Republicans that get elected become more and more ideologically pure by voting out the moderates, this country becomes more and more ungovernable. The public doesn't like that, but as of now has no real alternatives.

The people who cheer for gridlock as a good thing are nuts considering where the country is right now. Gridlock was great when the economy was roaring and debt was low, but we are in debt up to our eyeballs with the boomers about to retire and there are some major decisions and problems to deal with.

The rest of the world looks at us and sees a government that can't function anymore, and if that continues for long enough it is going to effect our ability to borrow as well as a whole host of other things because China (among others) has wondered aloud if there is a political mechanism/will in place to ever address our debt.

Instead of getting serious about getting our debt under control, they see Americans arguing among themselves whether we should keep the $3 trillion dollar tax cut in place, or the $3.8 trillion dollar tax cut in place as if money was no object. It is crazyness, and the politicians from each party are just driving us toward the cliff in a race to see who can get us there fast enough.

What obstruction? He had an untouchable majority for over a year, and still got 90% of everything he wanted even after dropping to 59 in the Senate. Unprecidented level of browbeating and sabre rattling? Absolutely. Actual obstruction? Not so much.

tk421;475135 wrote:Get your head out of Obama's ass and you'd realize how ridiculous you sound spouting crap like this. Like any Democrats gave help to Bush or any other Republican President. Don't try and act like the Dems are some high and mighty group trying to help the American people. Bullshit.

So Democrats have never helped a Republican President?? Are you fucking kidding me???

What did Repubs do to help Clinton or Jimmy Carter?? Jack Shit

Obama has done a wonderful job in uniting the war party members. More wars on the agenda with no end in sight. And the guy had the nads to lie to the American people that the US military involvement in Iraq is somehow over. Today, 2 American combat troops were killed in Iraq. More troops escaped death yesterday as they carried out military tasks in an operation whereby 12 Iraqis were killed. Just another faux pax part deaux.."mission accomplished" part 2.

He has also ratcheted up the narrative for bombing Iran, is already personally responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Pakistani citizens, and he's doing wonders in kick starting wars in Somalia and Yemen.

The Nobel Peace prize winner is truly earning his stripes, I must say.

Iggy - What obstruction? What hasn't he got that he wanted? The only one that comes to mind is Cap and Tax. He got all the bailouts he wanted, he's paid off his campaign donors with TAXPAYER dollars not his, he's got his ObamaKare up our keesters, he got his "stimulus", he got his "financial reform", he got his czars appointed without Congressional approval, he owns a car company....wait....check that...he owns TWO car companies, he fires CEOs that he doesn't like, he takes vacations every month, he plays golf more than any previous President, he flies his bride all over the globe at TAXPAYER expense not his, and he has had one of the largest majorities in Congress of any President any time. Now..who is obstructing him again?

Could it be...maybe....just possibly....by chance...that his stupid-ass policies DON'T work and he's seeing the comeupance that he and his Congressional minions deserve? How many more billions or trillions of dollars must be stolen from the future to somehow shock therapy this economy into nirvana? The problems are systemic, and no amount of shocking the system will cure what ails it. We must get control of our finances, our debt, and our future investments if we have any hope of surviving this economic meltdown. It will be painful. There will be pain for everyone. It may even throw us into a deeper recession. But spending until the printing presses lock-up will certainly lead to an ending without any hope and change.

In backing-up believer...gridlock will at least stop the scorching of the earth and allow for some fiscal sanity to return. We haven't had any of that in decades.

Actual obstruction? Not so much.

This graph has only the data up to 2008, but this Congress is on pace to beat the record by the 2007-08 Congress as far as filibusters. Requiring 60 votes to do anything gives defacto control of the Senate to the minority party unless you have 60+ that march in absolute lock step because losing even 1 kills any chance of passing legislation. As we saw with the Democrats, it gives each senator in that case the power to hold legislation hostage which makes governing nearly impossible unless you have like 70 senators in your caucus.

I think the filibuster is a necessary and useful tool, but we have now gotten to the point (and will going forward) where it has become a tool to completely choke off the senate by requiring 60 votes for absolutely everything. Politically it is a very effective strategy, which is why it will become the new MO for each party moving forward.

IggyPride00;475301 wrote:I think the filibuster is a necessary and useful tool, but we have now gotten to the point (and will going forward) where it has become a tool to completely choke off the senate by requiring 60 votes for absolutely everything. Politically it is a very effective strategy, which is why it will become the new MO for each party moving forward.

A filibuster can be stopped by the majority in two ways. They can bring all other business of the senate to a halt, and force debate to continue until someone in the opposition breaks under political pressure. Second they can introduce the so call "nuclear" option. The majority party can vote by simple majority to change the rules. The republicans attempted this to stop filibusters of judicial appointments and they failed.

Basically both the methods are balls moves. As it should be if you want to preserve the minority filibuster. It should be hard for the majority to overcome. But not impossible. It only appears impossible because politicians lack balls and leadership.

I am actually an advocate of keeping the filibuster but going back to the old way where you literally had to talk it out and read from the phone book. Get the cots out, and make it an ordeal.

It is too easy to filibuster now, which is why the numbers were so low for so long. It is not that partisanship is a new thing, but when they fussed with the filibuster rules in the 70's and eliminated the endurance component of halting all other business that the numbers spiked.

Without the filibuster the Senate is basically a redundancy of the House. It is vital to protect the minority, but we need to go back to the way it use to be because it was hard to do, and really only was used in extra-ordinary circumstances because of it.

I agree with you on that Iggy. Like I said politicians in the majority lack balls. They fear what the minority party may do to them if they regain the majority under their rules.

He has divided it more than anything.

Actual obstruction? Not so much.

I saw this headline tonight and it is a perfect example of the kind of thing that will now become standard operating procedure for both parties now that instead of throwing up the red flag on some judicial nominees it becomes a knock down drag out on all.

I am a registered Republican, so I am by no means defending liberals or BHO.

I am cognizant though that by escalating the level to which Republicans have gone to put the brakes on things, it will be given right back to us in spades the second "our side" gets power back.

Republicans wanted to blow up the filibuster over Bush judicial nominees and what they saw as Democrat obstruction at the time, but it turns out Democrats were downright generous about letting judges through compared to what we're doing now (almost 2 to 1). How smart will this have been when we can't get jack shit through in the future because they are giving us payback or equal treatment.

GOP Obstructionism Has Made President Least Successful at Filling Judicial Vacancies in 40 Years

A determined Republican stall campaign in the Senate has sidetracked so many of the men and women nominated by President Barack Obama for judgeships that he has put fewer people on the bench than any U.S. president since Richard Nixon at a similar point in his first term 40 years ago.

At this point in President George W. Bush's first term, 72 judges had been confirmed by a Senate that Democrats controlled for much of Bush's first two years. By contrast, the Senate has had 59 or 60 seats under Democratic control during Obama's tenure but has only confirmed 40 of his judges. Nixon, a Republican, got 33 judges through a Democratic-controlled Senate.

"What's interesting is you got a guy (Bush) who was barely elected president with a Senate in the hands of the opposing party, and he is going to come out better in his first two years than a guy who got elected with a big majority and had a big majority in the Senate too," said Brookings Institution scholar Russell Wheeler.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/06/politics/main6839525.shtml

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell has acknowledged that his strategy is partly payback for Democrats' blocking some Bush appointees.

From your article. Looks like the democrats are getting some payback. Guess their strategies under Bush were not very smart and aren't yielding them jack shit now. The democrats should call them on the carpet and force them to filibuster or shut up.

That said I disagree with both parties on this. Elections have consequences and congress should give deference to that. Unless a nominee is an imbecile or there is legitimate reasons to obstruct the president's nomination, he/she should be confirmed.